Loading...
11-10-08 agenda• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 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 October 28, 2008 and (2) Special City Council Meeting of October 28, 2008 PRESENTATIONS 1. Recognition of.Centennial Babies 2. Proclamation ,designating Richfield youth, Dale Austin, as 9-1-1 Hero COUNCIL DISCUSSION 3. Council discussion • Special City Council Meeting on Friday, January 2, 2009 • -Hats Off To Hometown Hits Notes: • AGENDA APPROVAL 4. Council approval of agenda • CONSENT CALENDAR 5. 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 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 resolution determining. results of City's General Election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008 S.R. No. 259 B. Consideration of approval of resolution designating City's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees S.R. No. 260 C. Consideration of approval of resolution amending previous agreement for Department of Public Safety/Police accepting funding from Hennepin County . Department of Human Services and Public Health for Joint Community Police Partnership Police Cadet Program S.R. No. 261 D. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Agency Agreement No. 93690 between Minnesota Department of Transportation and City of Richfield for construction engineering services to oversee construction of Lyndale Avenue bridge over I-494 and $20,000 work order to hire WSB & Associates to provide construction engineering services on Lyndale Avenue bridge project S.R. No. 262 E. Consideration of approval of agreement between Progressive Rail and City of Richfield to close at grade rail crossing on two frontage roads along I-494 in • Richfield and Bloomington as part of Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project S.R. No. 263 F. Consideration of approval of agreement between Center Point Energy and City of Richfield to relocate. natural gas pipeline as part of Lyndale Avenue bridge over I- 494 project S.R. No. 264 G. Consideration of approval of replacing stop sign with yield sign on Vincent Avenue at 62nd Street S.R. No. 265 H. Consideration of approval of agreement for purchase of services between City of Richfield and Hennepin County for Sentencing to Service work crews for 2008 in amount of $48,000 S_R. No. 266 I. Consideration of approval of continuation of plumbing and mechanical inspections and code enforcement contract with City of Bloomington for City of Richfield, with changes in costs S.R. No. 267 J. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing on December 9, 2008 for renewal of pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses for 2009 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inca and University Cash Company, LLC, d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry S.R.'No.268 K. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing on December 9, 2008 for renewal of on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for 2009 for Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill; Naviya's Thai Restaurant, Patrick's Bakery & Cafe and The Noodle Shop-Colorado .Inc. d/b/a Noodles and Company • S.R. No. 269 L. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing on December 9, 2008 for renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for 2009 for Khan's Mongolian Barbeque; Champps Operating Corporation d/b/a Champp's Restaurant; Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435; Fred Babcock VFW Post No. 5555 • d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink; Don Pablo's Operating Corporation d/b/a Don Pablo's; Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar; The Frenchmans; Taco Morelos; Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant;-and Richfield Hotel Associates d/b/a Ramada Inn S.R. No. 270 Notes: 6. Consideration of items, if any, removed from. Consent Calendar Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 7. Consideration of authorizing City Manager to execute agreement with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for certified building and performance standards for new Police/Fire/City Hall facility in amount not to exceed $152,500 Staff Report No. 271 • Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 8. City Manager's report Notes: 9. 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: • 10. 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.- AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5A REPORT # 259 • • ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NANCY GIBBS, CITY CLERK N TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL .CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution determining results of City General Election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution determining the results of the City General Election on Tuesda ,November 4, 2008. II. BACKGROUND The City General Election was conducted on Tuesday, November 4, 2008 in conjunction with the State General Election. The City General Election included contests for the. offices of Council Members of Wards 1, 2, and 3. The Richfield City Charter states that the Council shall meet and canvass the election returns at the next regular or Special Council meeting immediately following any regular, primary or special election, but in no event later than the time prescribed by State law, and must make full declaration of the results as soon as possible, and file a statement thereof. with the City Clerk. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 205 also governs the conduct of municipal election. Section 205.02 Subd. 2 states that all City elections a"re governed by Chapter 205 as far as practicable. Section 205.185 Subd. 3 sets the date for canvassing any city general election as "within seven days after an election." Moreover, the provisions of Chapter 205 preempt the City Charter; therefore the canvassing of election results is scheduled for the November 10, 2008 Regular City Council Meeting. 1120Canvass Election III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION i A. POLICY • The City Charter provides that the City Council declare the results of the election. • The Regular City Council Meeting of November 10 provides a timely opportunity to canvass the election results in accordance with State Statutes Chapter 205. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City Council must take action by November 11, 2008. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • City Charter Section 4.07 provides that the City Council declare the results of the Election. State Statute Chapter 205 sets the date for canvassing the election and controls over the charter provision. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • ~ N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • The resolution will be distributed at the City Council meeting. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • +~ ~~. RESOLUTION NO. 10166 r~ U • U RESOLUTION DETERMINING RESULTS OF THE GENERAL ELECTION OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2008 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the Council, having received and considered the tally of votes by the election judges of the General Election held November 4, 2008, the results are determined to be as follows: Votes cast for Council Member Ward 1 Four Year Term Pat Elliott 2,353 Gordon Hanson 2,024 Votes cast for Council Member Ward 2 Four Year Term Votes cast for Council Member Ward 3 Four Year Term Total number of voters in this election: 18,771 Fred Wroge 2,955 Ken Severson 2,349 Tom Fitzhenry 2,427 Josh Root 1,630 Attachment A is the complete tabulation of results. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following list of judges were those certifying returns of said election: Miles Abramson Sara Adams Stephanie Ahlstrand James Alagna Tanya Alsip Robert Amundson Alicia Anderson Janis Anderson .Marietta Andrada Delores Armstrong Mary Ann Ashmead Carol Athey James Atkins Cheryl Avenson Pat Bailey Joan Bargman Patricia Bates Corliss Becker Felicia Beltran Sharita Benson Robert Berge Marlys Bergstrom Ella Bert Kaitlin Besser Marilyn Birkelo Thomas Birkelo Kevin Birt Trenton Blades Kimberly. Blomberg Mary Boespflug Reed Bornholdt Louise Bouta Ellen Brandon Kayla Brehmer Katie Brekken Cynthia Briones Skylar Buckman Hazel Burnside Marjorie Cain Laura Calbone Kelsey. Cardarelle Angela Carlson Jan Carroll Sydney Chameski Alex Clements Ellen Clements Cody Copeland Stanley Cromer Jerrid Crump Ellen Cutter David Dahl Marie Dallager Viengpheth Daoheuang Emily Day Sandra Decker Gladys Denesen Delrose Desrosier Jack Dhein Marguerite Dozois Cindy Dubansky Jordan Dykes Denise Eckerman Dee Ann Edlund Liz Ekholm Betty Elenbaas Waleed Elrashidi Linda Elsen Margaret Erickson Susanne Erickson Justin Etheridge Mary Jo Fadell Denise Famodu Donna Fischer Sheila Fitzgerald Jette Floberg Sarah Flynn Beatrice Frankus Phil Freeman Ben Freund Latricia Fuller-Reason Mary Gagne Angela Gallant Rosemary Gardner Nancy Garwick . David Gausman Kathy Gesler Dennis Gillespie Earlene Goalen Jessica Gotfredson Mary Gover Tom Graham Patricia Grahn James Grant Rebecca Guarino Roger Guarino Alexandra Guetan Tyler Guggenberger David Gunderson Betty Gustafson Earl Hagen Gashaw Hailu Robert Hall Char Hanson Graham Hanson Kyah Hanzal Leonard Hardie Ryan Harjula Reed Harms Joe Harris Josh Harrisville Nick Harrisville Mike Hayek Adrienne Hayes Linda Heaner Jill Heinecke Jackie Heinen Gertrude Herll Jacoby Hernick Ruth Hiland Merlin Hill Colton Hinz Linda Hinz Oliver Hoffman Ilene Holen Alyssa Hollenback JoAnn Holt Jeanette Holter JeNee Honnigford Nancy Hoon Marion Horning Donald Houlding Bob Houlton Molly Illes Pamela January Kierra Jeffers Janie Jefferson Brita Jensen John Jobe Jeff Johnson Sita Johnson Sophia Johnson Michael Jones Janell Joyner Kalla Kalloway Betty Kamps Danette Kamrath Thomas Keegan Phillip Kelly Bev Kenealey Nancy Kerr • Claire Killian Nancy Kilpeck June King Elisabeth Kingdon Erica Klein Donna Knesting Rosemary Koelln Justin Kor Joseph Kovach Lois Kovach Joan Kraft Bernadette Lais Kathie Lane Matt Lara Amy Larson Erik Lasserud Jamila Lee Susan Lewis Nancy Lindberg Cherill Lindquist Kaycee Lommen .Lester Loney Jeanne Loomis Dorothy Lowe June Lu Don Ludwig Michelle Lunneborg Brandon Lynch Eleanor Maanum Aleta Macon Derek Madsen Emily Madsen Abelardo Malicsi Cynthia Mandl Jennifer Manikong M. Karen Maroo Thomas Marso David Martin Norma Martin Paul Matuschek Andrew May Beverly McCain Johnathon McClellan Karin McComb Devon McMorris Elie Mejia John Rock Meland Sandy Menning James Menter Andrew Meurding Justin Mollan Alice Monsen Courtney Montgomery Richard Morey Carol Mortenson Philip Mortenson Isabelle Moulinier Eileen Muelken Don Mueller Peggy Mullick Tom Murphy Geraldine Nachicas Helen Nachicas Ivar Natins LaKandis Neal Quiana Nelson • Linda Nemitz Cody Newman Amanda Nix Jamie Noonan Cindy Norland Jack Novak David Nyholm Jan Nyholm Martha Obenchain Brad Obert Joy O'Brien Marlene Odegard Mari Ojeda Chris Okey Joan Olinger Mary Olson Robert Olson Samantha Olson Lois Omlie Molly Opitz Fern Oreck Julia O'Sullivan Maurissa Overton Mark Pafiolis • Jeannine Pafko Ruth Pafko Mario Palaia Haley Paszkiewicz Paul Perkal Nicole Peterson Monica Petrov Aaron Pipkin Francis Ploog Mandy Poke Diamond Quinenes Diane Rappe Thomas Rappe Theresa Redington Julie Remarcik Carolyn Ring Harriet Ring Ward Ring Kate Rivers Donna Roe Paul Roe Jeff Rundgren Erich Russell Rachel Sathre Jeet Sausen Donald Sayler Bryan Scanlon Phil Schaffer Sandy Schmidt Harald Schoubye Margaret Schow Derek Schramm Judith Schultz Andrew Seffrood Tauriana Silva Eric Smith Margaret Smith William Snyder Elisa Sorensen Becky Spitzack Jim Spitzack Erin Stertz-Follett Jason Stroth Ryley Struckman Catherine Sullivan Roger Swanson Michele Swarbrick Jean Swenson Rudy Taong Ed Thom Myrtle Thom Doris Thorson Kathy Tighe Claire Todd Pat Toney Xuan Tu John Twisk Gertrude Ulrich Beatrice Van Liew Marinda Vandekieft James Versteeg Kenneth Vevea Linda Vigen Denise Walter Kelsie Wangerin Norzin Wangpo • Pearl Weitbrecht Katie Wellens Bob Wells Elaine Wetsch Candice Wheeler Mark Whitehead DePaul Willette Susan Williams Jane Winberg Genevieve Wodnick Joan Wold Marian Woolery Twila Wysocki Yer Yang Betty Young Lavert Young Janelle Zeinelabdin Kendall Zilka PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of November, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk n U -J City of Richfield Pagelofl 11/10/2008 10:31:13 AM November 4; 2008 General Election Results CITY OFFICES Precinct Total % 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Council Member -City of Richfield Ward 1 Pat Elliott 2,353 Gordon Hanson 2,024 Write-I n 42 Over Votes 1 Under Votes 1,604 Council Member -City of Richfield Ward 2 Ken Severson 2,349 Fred Wroge 2,955 Write-I n 54 Over Votes 2 Under Votes 2,085 Council Member -City of Richfield Ward 3 Tom Fitzhenry 2,427 • Josh Root 1,630 Write-I n 42 Over Votes 2 Under Votes 1,179 VOTER TURNOUT Registered Voters Persons Registered at 7:00 AM New Registrations at the Polls TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS Ballots Cast Number Voting at Polls Regular Absentee Overseas Absentee Presidential Absentee TOTAL PERSONS VOTING .Turnout Percentage 39.1 % 945 717 691 33.6% 882 659 483 0.7% 14 19 9 0.0% 1 0 0 26.6% 641 561 .402 31.6% 941 1,074 334 39.7% 1,185 1,264 506 0.7% 19 24 11 0.0% 2 0 0 28.0% 917 906 262 46.0% 691 911 825 30.9% 388 610 632 0.8% 13 17 12 0.0% 0 1 1 22.3% 310 484 385 Precinct Total % 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. 20,711 85.8% 1,600 3,428 2,704 2,122 1,698 3,522 1,272 2,353 2,012 3,420 14.2% 234 486 455 437 275 626 148 362 397 24,131 100.0% 1,834 3,914 3,159 2,559 1,973 4,148 1,420 2,715 2,409 15,882 84.6% 1,251 2,218 2,085 1,787 1,390 2,745 990 1,751 1,665 2,840 15.1% 151 843 389 167 191 519 121 270 189 35 0.2% 4 8 3 2 4 5 3 4 2 14 0.1% 0 0 10 0 1 1 2 0 0 18,771 100.0% 1,406 3,069 2,487 1,956 1,586 3,270 1,116 2,025 1,856 77.8% 76.7% 78.4% 78.7% 76.4% 80.4% 78.8% 78.6% 74.6% 77.0% AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5B REPORT # 260 • ~~ .STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING • NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: FRANCIE FLETCHER, H. R. COORDINATOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the resolution designating City's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance remiums for General Services and Mana ement em to ees. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolution designating the City's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees. III. BACKGROUND I The City contributes to the cost of premiums for four kinds of insurance coverages available to City employees.. Full-time Management and General Services employee contributions are discussed within this staff report as well as contributions toward health insurance for part-time regular General Services employees. Other employees are covered under terms of labor agreements. LIFE _ A $25,000 term life insurance policy is provided. for all full-time Management and General Services employees. The City pays the full premium for this insurance. The rate for 2009 will remain at $4.35 per month per employee. DENTAL The second type of insurance provided to full-time Management and General Services employees is aself-funded group dental insurance. In 2008, the City • contributed $32 per~month peremployee for the total cost of employee (not dependent) coverage. For 2009, the City's contribution will increase to $34 per .month per employee. Employees who desire dependent coverage must pay the full cost of such additional premium, which will be $40 per month for 2009. This is a $4 increase from 2008. Inasmuch as dental insurance is self-funded, the City establishes the dental rates from year to year internally, based upon administrative 1110 Ins Benefits and benefit payout cost data. Analysis of the dental fund performance for the past three years indicates that rate increases are necessary. HEALTH INSURANCE FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES • The third type of insurance coverage. available to full-time Management and General Services employees is group health coverage. The Local Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS) group will again offer HealthPartners Health Insurance. 2009 will be the second year of athree-year contract with HealthPartners. The LOGIS HealthPartners plan offers employees a choice of four plans with an open access network of physicians. Two of the plans are high deductible plans that include a Health Savings Account. In an effort to remain flexible and keep rate increases as low as possible, LOGIS will continue to offer afour-tier system, giving employees the choice of employee only, employee plus spouse, employee plus child(ren) and family option. By providing this four-tier rating system some employees are able to benefit, by choosing the employee plus spouse option or employee plus child(ren) option. The City will continue to pay the full individual employee premium and provide an additional contribution toward dependent coverage up to a specified maximum insurance premium. In 2009, the City's monthly contribution for Management and General Services employees will be increased from $730 to $780 for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren) tiers and from $780 to $830 for the family coverage tier. The City's contribution- for Management and General Services employees as a percent of premium over the past several years is shown in Attachment 1. • Full-time employees have the option to waive health insurance coverage through the City if they prove they have coverage elsewhere. Employees electing to waive coverage will receive an additional $50 per month on their pay check. This $50 will be taxed as .regular income. The 2008 and 2009. monthly premium costs of the health plans are: U 2008 HP 2009 HP 2008 HP 2009 HP O en Access O en Access Distinctions Distinctions Employee Onl $497.23 $576.61 $463.24 $537.18 Employee Plus S ouse $1,057.86 $1,226.94 $988.09 $1,146.01 Employee Plus Child ren $1,002.29 $1,162.48 $933.50 $1,0820.68 Famil $1,308.91 $1,518.16 $1,219.10 $1,413.98 2008 HP -$1100 2009 HP $1150 New in 2009. 2009 HP $2500 Deductible with Deductible with Deductible with - HSA HSA HSA Employee Onl $355.07 $407.43 $378.85 Employee Plus S ouse $757.10 $868.94 $807.87 Employee Plus Child ren $715.27 $820.92 $763.24 Famil $934.04 $1,072.05 $996.69 HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PART-TIME REGULAR EMPLOYEES The City will .continue to contribute 75% of the single health care premium for part- time regular employees and increase the dependent coverage contribution to $390 -per month for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren) tiers and • $415 for the family coverage tier. Part-time employees may opt out of health insurance altogether. LONG-TERM DISABILITY (LTD) The fourth type of insurance provided to all employee groups is long-term disability insurance (LTD). LTD is provided through a group policy secured by the City. The LTD rate for 2009 remains at 34 cents per $100 of covered payroll. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City continues to provide adequate insurance protection for the Management and General Services employee groups, which are comparable to other City employee groups, as well as employees performing similar jobs incomparable communities. • By providing the same coverages, greater benefit equality is achieved between female classes found in Management and .General Services groups. and male classes. found in the contracted labor units. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City should implement the premium increases for coverages by December 1, 2008. Payroll deductions for January insurance • payments, the beginning of the new insurance period, are calculated in December. C. FINANCIAL • The funding necessary to provide for the premium. contributions as recommended will be addressed in the 2009 Revised Budget. • With the increase recommended, Richfield's contribution will be about average with those of comparable metro cities. D. LEGAL • In order to provide the requested insurance benefit changes, the City Council must approve the resolution designating the City's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The Council may take no action to increase the insurance premiums beyond .the current 2008 funding IeveL . • Defer discussion to another date. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • The City's Contribution Toward Dependent Health Insurance as a Percent of • Total Premium Cost VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. ~,~..' j RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE • PREMIUM FOR MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the hospital-medical/surgical group health insurance plan is available from the LOGIS Health Insurance program for City employees and their families; and WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is available from the Local Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS) for City . employees; and WHEREAS, aself-funded group dental insurance plan is available to City Management and General Services employees and their.families; and WHEREAS, a group short-term and long-term disability program is available to City Management and General Services employees; and WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by resolution the City's contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of $780 per month for family health insurance to full-time employees, and in any event, said contributions shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. The City shall give to full-time employees not participating in the City's health plan, a sum of • $50 per month, which will be taxed as regular income. For all full-time Management and General Services employees; the City shall also pay the $34 monthly premium for the offered dental insurance plan, and the $4.35 monthly premium for the term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan, for a total possible maximum 2009 insurance premium contribution of $868.35 per month. The City shall contribute 75% of the single health care premium for part-time regular employees and a maximum of $415 per month towards dependent coverage. Part-time employees shall also receive a portion of short-term disability insurance dependent upon hours worked. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1, 2009. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall contribute the full cost of long-term disability insurance for full-time Management and General Services employees. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall determine the City's contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of the appropriate resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective organized employee groups.. Adopted by the City Council, of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of November 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Attachment 1 ~~~ The Citv's Contribution Toward Dependent Health Insurance as a Percent of Total Premium Cost EAR HEALTH DEPENDENT CITY CONTRIBUTION CITY CONTRIBUTION PLAN PREMIUM MGMT./GEN. SVCS AVERAGE % OF COST PREM I U M 2005 MEDICA High Option * Employee + Spouse $800.37 * Employee + Children $756.10 * Family $987.70 Elect/Essential Option * Employee + Spouse $731.11 * Employee + Children $690.66 * Family $902.97 MIC 1000 * Employee + ..Spouse $713.02 * Employee + " Children $673.57 *. Family $880.35 • 2006 MEDICA High Option * Employee + Spouse $896.41 * Employee + Children $846.83 * Family $1106.22 Elect/Essential Option * Employee + Spouse $818.84 * Employee + Children $773.54 * Family $1010.99 MIC 1000 * Employee + Spouse $798.58 * Employee + Children $754.40 * Family $985.99 2007 MEDICA High Option * • Employee + Spouse $1039.84. * Employee + Children $ 982.32 * Family $1283.22 $605 $650 $650 $605 $650 $650 .$605 $650- $650 $655 $655 $700 $655 $655 $700 $655 $655 $700 $705 $705 $750 76% 80% 66% 83% 88% 72% 85% 90% 74% 73% 77% 63% 80% 85% 69% 82% 87% 71% 68% 72% 58% ~~3 2007 co ntinued - Elect Option * Employee + Spouse $ 949.85 $705 * Employee + • Children $ 897.31 $705 * Family $1172.75 $750 Low Option * Employee + Spouse $ 926.35 $705 * Employee + Children $ 875.10 $705 * Family $1143.75 $750 2008 HealthPartners Open Access Choice * Employee + . Spouse $1057.86 $730 * Employee + Children $1002.29 $730 * Family - $1308.91 $780 Distinctions * Employee + Spouse $ 988.09 ~ $730 * Employee + Children $ 933.50 $730 * Family $1219.10 $780 High Deductible HSA * Employee + Spouse $ 757.10 $730 • * Employee + Children $ 715.27 . $730 * Family $ 934.04. $780 2009 HealthPartners Open Access Choice * Employee + Spouse $1226.94 $780 * Employee + Children $1162.48 $780 * Family $1518.16 $830 Distinctions * Employee + Spouse $1146.01 $780 * Employee + Children. $1082.68 $780 * Family $1414.98 $830 High Deductible HSA $1150 * Employee + Spouse $ 868.94 $780 * Employee + Children $ 820.92 $780 * Family $1072.05 $830 High Deductible HSA $2500 • * Employee Spouse $ 807.87 $780 * Employee + Children $ 763.24 $780 * Family $ 996.69 $830 74% 79% 64% 76% 81% 66% 69% 73% 60% 74% 78% 64% 96% 102% 8.4% 64% 67% 55% 68% 72% 59% 90% 95% 77% 97% 102% 83% • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # SC REPORT # 9F,1 ~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 • REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~j REVIEW: ~J REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: POLICE LIEUTENANT TODD SANDELL NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Approve resolution to amend agreement with Hennepin County for Police Cadet Program. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve amendment to previously approved agreement with Hennepin County Department of Human Resources and Public Health for JCPP Police Cadet Program that: • Extends period of coverage to include January through December of 2009, and • Adds additional $30,000 funds for the new period. II. BACKGROUND To reiterate, the Richfield Police Division has accepted a grant from Hennepin County for. the Joint Community Police Partnership (JCPP). One component of the partnership is the police cadet program. Police has completed a competitive selection process and hired a Police Cadet in accordance to the agreement. On October 23, 2008, staff received a revised agreement that extends the "term of the agreement" from May 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008 to include the period • January 1 through December 31, 2009. The revised agreement also included another $30,000 (not to exceed $30,000) for the extended period. 1110 Resolution Accepting Change to Hennepin County Agreement for Cadet Program Funds III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Agreement originally was for the period May 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008, and was approved by City Council on May 8, 2007. • A Police Cadet, Alan Salvosa, was hired on August 8, 2008. The selection process included application review and an oral interview, a thorough background investigation, Chief's review, and a medical exam that included drug testing, and a psychological exam. • The Joint Community Police Partnership (JCPP) and the Police Cadet Program are designed to better address the diverse needs of Richfield's diverse cultures and communities and enhance the safety and well-being of the residents. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • Hennepin County will provide funding to accommodate the cadet's salary, fringe benefits, testing, uniforms and equipment, tuition • assistance books, supplies and application fees not to exceed $30,000 for 2009. D. LEGAL • Contract agreement with Hennepin County. E, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Not. accept the additional funds that our department will need for the coming year, January 1, through December 31, 2009. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution to Accept Amendment to previously approved agreement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • 5~-1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE PREVIOUS AGREEMENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY/POLICE TO ACCEPT FUNDING FROM THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES AND PUBLIC HEALTH FOR A POLICE CADET PROGRAM WHEREAS, the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department, has identified the City of Richfield as a segment of the County that is in need of Cadet Training services; and; WHEREAS, the County of Hennepin has funds available and wishes to purchase such services from the City of Richfield/Police; and, WHEREAS, the Public Safety Department/Police has received an amendment to the said agreement from Hennepin County Departmenf of-Human Services and Public Health that extends the agreement to include the year 2009 (January through December); WHEREAS, the City of Richfield/Police will provide Cadet Training services through a cost reimbursement contract described as "training and educational opportunities in conformance with police department rules and procedures, and will provide recruitment, interviewing, supervision, support and training to selected cadets;" and, • WHEREAS, Richfield Public Safety/Police has agreed to the terms as set forth in the Human Services and Public Health Department Provider Agreement and will sign such agreement upon Council approval of this resolution; and, WHEREAS, City Manager Steve Devich and Public Safety Director Dan Scott were authorized to execute such agreement, and Dan Scott has since retired, newly appointed Public Safety Director Barry Fritz is, hereby, authorized to facilitate and make available whatever is needed to carry out the terms of the agreement; and, WHEREAS, the agreement will now be in effect from May 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department, will accept the provisions of the agreement and receive reimbursement as detailed in the agreement for Cadet Training services. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of November 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk the event changes to the plans need to be made based on unanticipated conditions encountered in the field. The design of the Lyndale Bridge came in about $200,000 under budget. City staff is recommending reallocating $162,000 of the unspent federal funds from the design work to be used to pay a consultant to perform the construction inspection " services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge. The City used this same approach on the Penn Avenue Bridge. In order to use federal funds, the City needs to prepare a request for proposals that takes considerable time. In the interim, City staff is recommending hiring WSB & Associates using $20,000 of the City's Municipal State Aid Street funds until the work qualifies for federal funds. WSB & Associates designed the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project and has engineering staff capable of providing the necessary construction engineering services. If the City is unable to qualify the work for federal funding, City staff will return to the Council with a request to use MSA funds to perform all remaining construction engineering work at an estimated cost of $162,000. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • • Replacement of the Lyndale Avenue. Bridge over I-494 was identified as a need in the City's .1997 Comprehensive Plan. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • It is important to answer the contractor's questions about plan interpretation quickly and accurately to assure that the project stays on schedule. C. FINANCIAL • Funding for the"$162,000 in construction engineering. services will be 100% federal funds reallocated from the design contract for the Lyndale Avenue Bridge .Project following a request for proposals procedure required by the Federal Government. • Municipal State Aid funds (City's gas tax revenues) will be used to pay. for the $20,000 work order to hire WSB to begin providing Construction engineering services until the federal funds can be secured. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney. has reviewed the Agency Agreement. • E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The Lyndale Bridge Project has already received all required state and. federal environmental approvals. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to reject the proposed agency agreement. However, City staff is not equipped to provide the kind of specialized technical services required for overseeing bridge construction. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing approval of Agency Agreement No. 93690 between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Richfield for Construction Engineering for the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over i-494 Project. • Agency Agreement No 93690 between the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the City of Richfield for Construction Engineering for the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over i-494 Project the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over 1- 494 Project • Lyndale Avenue Bridge Over I-494 Layout VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated • • ~~Vi RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF AGENCY AGREEMENT N0.93690 BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING FOR THE LYNDALE AVENUE BRIDGE OVER I-494 PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to replace the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over -494; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield will require construction engineering services to assist the City in overseeing construction of the new Lyndale Avenue Bridge; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wishes to use federal highway funds to finance the hiring of a qualified engineering consulting firm to perform the needed construction engineering services for the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over I-494 Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to Minnesota Stat. Sec. 161.36, the Commissioner of Transportation be appointed as Agent of the City of Richfield to accept as its agent, federal aid funds which may be made available for eligible transportation related projects; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and the City Manager are hereby • authorized and directed for and on behalf of the City to execute and enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Transportation prescribing the terms and conditions of said federal aid participation as set forth and contained in "Minnesota Department of Transportation Agency Agreement No. 93690," a copy of which said agreement was before the City Council and which is made a part hereof by reference. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 10th day of November, 2008. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • SQ-a- • Mn/DOT Agreement No. 93690 STATE OF MINNESOTA AGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING FOR S.P. 157-363-19 and 157-363-29; M.P. CA04 MN078(101), TA05 MN090(100), HPP MN 10(106} AND HPP MN 104{ 100) This agreement is entered into by and between CITY OF RICHFIELD {"City") and the State of Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("Mn/DOT"), Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.36, the City desires Mn/DOT to act as the City's agent to accept and disburse federal funds for the construction, improvement, or enhancement of transportation financed in whole or in part by federal funds, hereinafter referred to as the "Project"; and • The City is proposing a federal aid project to perform construction engineering on the reconstruction of Lyndale Avenue at Interstate 494 in Richfield, hereinafter referred to as the "Construction Engineering"; and The Construction Engineering is eligible for the expenditure of federal aid funds, and is identified in Mn/DOT records as State Project I57-363-19 and 157-363-29, and in Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA") records as Minnesota Project CA04 MN078(101), TA05 MN090{ 100), HPP MN 10(106) AND HPP MN 104(100); and Mn/DOT requires that the terms and conditions of this agency be set forth in an agreement. THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: DUTIES OF THE CITY. A. DESIGNATION. The City designates Mn/DOT to act as its agent to accept and disburse federal funds made available for the Project. B. ELIGIBILITY /COSTS. The estimated cost of the Construction Engineering is $162,000. • Agreement no. 93690 -1- 5 ~- 3 1. It is anticipated that 100% (up to $ 162,000) of the cost of the Construction Engineering will be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA. The City will pay any part of the cost or expense of the work that the FHWA does not pay. 2. Any costs incurred by the City prior to authorization of the Federal Funds, will not be eligible for federal participation. 3. Eligible cost and expense, if approved, may consist of the following: a) The cost of conducting the construction engineering and oversight for the referenced project. b) Expenditures for materials, supplies, mechanical data processing and equipment rental, Iimited to the actual expenditures for the purposes of this agreement. c) The cost incurred by the City to employ outside forces to perform any or all of the work. pursuant to this agreement, subject to the provisions of section I.D. SUBLETTING. 4. Expenditures for general administration, .supervision, maintenance and other overhead or incidental expenses of the City are not eligible for federal • participation. 5. Acceptability of casts under this agreement will be determined m accordance with the cost principles and procedures set forth in the applicable Federal Acquisition Regulations, Contract Cost Principals and Procedures, 48 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 31 which is incorporated by reference and made a part of this agreement. 6. For costs expected to exceed $ 162,000, the City must request the preparation and execution of a supplement to this agreement, prior to incurring such costs. C. STAFFING 1 _ The City will designate a publicly employed registered engineer, ("Project Engineer"), to be in responsible charge of the Project and to supervise and direct the work to be performed under any construction contract let for the Project. If City elects to use a private. consultant for engineering services, the City will provide a qualified, full-time public employee of the City, to be in responsible charge of the Project. The services of the City to be performed pursuant to this agreement may not be assigned, sublet, or transferred unless the City is notified in writing by Mn/DOT that such action is permitted under 23 CFR 1.33 and 23 CFR 635.1 OS and state law. This written consent will in no way relieve the City from its primary responsibility for performance of the work. i Agreement no. 93690 -2- 5~-~ • 2. During the progress of the work on the Project, the City authorizes its Project Engineer to request in writing specific engineering and/or technical services from Mn/DOT, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 161.39. Such services maybe covered by other technical service agreements. If Mn/DOT furnishes the services requested, and if Mn/DOT requests reimbursement, then the City will promptly pay Mn/DOT to reimburse the state trunk highway fund for the full cost and expense of furnishing such services. The costs and expenses will include the . can ent Mn/DOT labor additives and overhead rates, subject to adjustment based on actual direct costs that have been verified by audit. Provision of such services will not be deemed to make Mn/DOT a principal or co-principal with respect to the Project. 3. The City will furnish the personnel, services, supplies, and equipment necessary to properly supervise, inspect, and document the work for the Project. D. SUBLETTING. The City will prepare request for proposals in accordance with Minnesota law and applicable Federal laws and regula#ions. 1. The City will solicit proposals for construction engineering services after obtaining written notification from Mn/DOT that the FHWA has authorized the Project, Any Project advertised prior to authorization w711 not be eligible for federal reimbursement. • 2. The City will prepare the request for proposal, which will include a1I of the federal-aid provisions supplied by Mn/DOT. 3. The City will prepare and publish the proposal solicitation for the Project as required by state and federal laws. The City will include in the solicitation the required language for federal-aid contracts as supplied by Mn/DOT. The solicitation will state where the City will receive the proposals. 4. The City may not include other work in the contract for the authorized Project without obtaining prior notification from Mn/DOT that such work is allowed by FHWA. Failure to obtain such notification may result in the loss of some or all of the federal funds for the Project. 5. The City will prepare proposal packages and prepare and distribute any addendums, if needed 6. The City will receive open, and evaluate proposals. 7. After the proposals are opened, the City will consider the proposals begin negotiations on the price of the Preliminary Engineering in accordance with the practice commonly known as Quality Based Selection. If the proposal contains a goal for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, the City will not award the contract until it has received certification of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation from the Mn/DOT Equal Employment Opportunity Office. i Agreement no. 43690 -3- ~~~ • $. This written consent will in no way relieve the City from its primary responsibility for performance of the work. Subcontractor agreements must contain all appropriate terms and conditions of this agreement. E. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION. l . The City will request approval from Mn/DOT for all costs in excess of the amount of federal funds previously approved for the Project prior to incurring such costs. Failure to obtain such approval may result in such costs being disallowed for reimbursement. 2. The City will prepare reports, keep records, and perform work so as to enable Mn/DOT to collect the federal aid sought by the City. The City will retain all records and reports in accordance with Mn/DOT's record retention schedule for federal aid projects. 3. Upon completion of the Project, the Project Engineer will determine whether the work will be accepted. F. PAYMENTS. 1. The entire cost of the Project is to be paid from federal funds made available by the FHWA and by other funds provided by the City. The City will pay any part of the cost or expense of the Project that is not paid by federal funds. • 2. The City may request partial payments not more than once each thirty {30} days. The Project Engineer will certify the amount of each partial estimate. 3. The invoice and supplements thereto, will contain all details that may be necessary for a proper audit. Such details will consist of at least the following: (a) A breakdown of labor by individual, classification, dates and hours worked times the applicable rate to arrive at a total dollar amount for each individual. (b} The labor additive may be applied to total labor dollars, not including overtime labor dollars. {c) The equipmen# charges must be broken down by type of equipment times the applicable rate and dates used to arrive at total equipment charges. (d) A detailed breakdown of outside .services used and supporting invoices and documentation that costs of outside services have been paid. {e) Detail for materials, supplies, and other items with the description, units, and unit prices included in the invoice. If materials or supplies are purchased from an outside source, a copy of that invoice should be . included. Agreement no. 9 +690 -4- 5Q-~ • (f) The invoices will include 100% of eligible charges applicable to the Construction Engineering so that the prorata share of federal and City participation can be applied to the total costs. 4. Following certification, by the Project Engineer, of the final estimate, the City may request reimbursement for casts eligible for federal funds. The City's request will he made to Mn/DOT and will include a copy of the certified final estimate along with the required records. 5. Reimbursement of costs under this agreement will be based on actual costs, but limited to eligible items. G. LIMITATIONS. 1. The City must comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, and regulations. 2. Nondiscrimination. It is the policy of the FHWA and the State of Minnesota that no person in the United States will, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance (42 U.S.C. 2000d). Through expansion of the mandate for • nondiscrimination in Title VI and through parallel legislation, the proscribed bases of discrimination include race, color, sex, national origin, age, and disability. In addition, the Title VI program has been extended to cover all programs, activities. and services of an entity receiving Federal financial assistance, whether such programs and activities are Federally assisted or not. Even in the absence of prior discriminatory practice or usage, a recipient in administering a program or activity to which this part applies, is expected to take affirmative action to assure that no person is excluded from participation in, or is denied the benefits of, the program or activity on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. It is the responsibility of the City to carry out the above requirements. 3. Workers' Compensation. Any and all employees of the City or other persons while. engaged in the performance of any work or services required or pe~nitted by the City under this agreement will not be considered employees of Mn/DOT, and any and all claims that may arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of Minnesota on behalf of said employees, or other persons while so engaged, will in no way be the obligation or responsibility of MnlDOT. The City will require proof of Workers' Compensation Insurance from any contractor and sub- contractor. H. AUDIT. • Agreeme~at no. 9;690 -5- 5~ - `7 • 1. The City wiIl comply with the Single Audit Act of 1984 and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) circular A-133 including amendments and successors thereto, which are incorporated herein by reference. 2. As provided under Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, subdivision 5, all books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and. practices of the City are subject to examination by the United States Government, Mn/DOT, and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate, for a minimutri.of six years. The City will be responsible for any costs associated with the performance of the audit. I: MAINTENANCE. The City assumes full responsibility for the operation and maintenance of any facility constructed or improved under this Agreement. J. CLAIMS. The City acknowledges that Mn/D01' is acting only as the City's agent for acceptance and disbursement of federal funds, and not as a principal or co- principal with respect to the Project. The City will pay any and a1I lawful claims arising out of or incidental to the Project including, without limitation, claims related to contractor selection (including the solicitation, evaluation, and acceptance or rejection of bids or proposals), acts or omissions in perfomung the Project work, and any ultra vices acts. The City tivill indemnify, defend (to the extent permitted by the Minnesota Attorney General), .and hold Mn/DOT harmless from any claims or costs arising out of or incidental to the Project, • including reasonable attorney fees incurred by Mn/DOT. The City's indemnification obligation extends to any actions related to the certification of DBE participation, even if such actions are recommended by Mn/DOT. II. DUTIES OF Mn/DOT. A. ACCEPTANCE. Mn/DOT accepts designation as Agent of the City for the receipt and disbursement of federal funds and will act in accordance herewith. B. PROJECT ACTIVITIES. i. Mn/DOT will make the necessary requests to the FHWA for authorization to use federal funds for the Project, and for reimbursement of eligible costs pursuant to the terms of this agreement. 2. Mn/DOT will provide to the City copies of the required Federal-aid clauses to be included in the proposal solicitation and will provide the required Federal-aid provisions to be included in the Proposal. 3. Mn/DOT will review and certify the DBE participation and notify the City when certification is complete. C. PAYMENTS. 1. Mn/DOT will receive the federal funds to be paid by the FHWA for the Project, . Agreement no. 9;690 -6- ~~~g pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 161.36, Subdivision 2. 2. Ivln/DOT will review and certify each partial pay request. Following certifcation of the partial estimate, Mn/DOT will reimburse the City, from said federal funds made available to the Project, for each partial payment request, subject to the availability and limits of those funds. 3. Upon completion of the Project, the City will prepare a final payment request in accordance with the terms of this agreement. Mn/DOT will review and certify the final payment request with a Enal audit. 4. No more than 90% of the reimbursement due under this agreement will be paid until completion of the final audit and approval by Mn/DOT's authorized representative. 5. In the event Mn/DOT does not obtain funding from the FI-IWA or other funding source, or funding cannot be continued at a sufficient level to allow for the processing of the federal aid reimbursement requests, the City may continue the work with local fundsonly, until such time as Mn/DOT is able to process the federal aid reimbursement requests. D. AUTHORITY. MnIDOT may withhold federal funds, if Mn/DOT or the FHWA determines that the Project was not completed in compliance with federal requirements. E. INSPECTION. Mn/DOT, the FHWA, or duly authorized representatives of the state and federal government will have the right to audit, evaluate and monitor the work performed under this agreement. The City will make available alI books, records, and documents pertaining to the work hereunder, for a minimum of seven years following the closing of the construction contract. III. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES.. Each authorized representative will have responsibility to administer this agreement and to ensure that all payments due to the other party are paid pursuant to the terms of this agreement. A. The City authorized representative is Thomas Foley, Transportation Engineer, City of Richfield, 6704 Portland Avenue, Richfield, MN 55423-2599„ or his successor. B. Mn/DOT's authorized representative is Lynnette Roshell, Minnesota Department of Transportation, State Aid for Local Transportation, 395 John Ireland Boulevard, Mail Stop 500, St Paul, MN 55155, phone 651.366.3822, or her successor. IV. TORT LIABILITY. Each party is responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of any others and the results thereof. The Minnesota Tort Claims Act, • Minnesota Statutes Section. 3.736, governs Mn/DOT liability. A~eement no. 93690 -7- ~~ ^ I V. ASSIGNMENT. Neither party will assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this agreement without prior written approval of the other party. VI. AMENDMENTS. Any amendments/supplements to this Agreement must be in writing and be executed by the same parties who executed the original agreement, or their successors in office. VII. TERM OF AGREEMENT. This agreement will be effective upon execution by the City and by appropriate State officials, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section IfiC.05, and will remain in effect for fZVe {5) years from the effective date or until all obligations set forth in this agreement have been satisfactorily fulf ]led, whichever occurs first. VIII. TERMINATION. This agreement may be terminated by the City or Mn/DOT at any time, with or without cause, upon ninety (90) days written notice to the other party. Such termination will not remove any unfulfilled financial obligations of the City as set forth in this Agreement. In the event of such a termination the City will be entitled to reimbursement for Mn/DOT-approved federally eligible expenses incurred for work satisfactorily performed on the Project to the date of termination subject to the terms of this agreement. Remainder of this page left intentionally blank -8- Agreement no. 9;69fl : , ~~~ • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed intending to be bound thereby. CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION City certifies that the appropriate person(s) By: have executed the contract on its behalf as required Title: Director, State Aid far Locai Transportation by applicable resolutions, ordinances, or charter • provisions -Date: By: Debbie Goettel COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION Date: By: Mayor Date: Title: By: Steven L. Devich • Date: Title: City Manager d • Agreement no. 43690 -9- 5IJ- ~ I r ~. c ~ _. a N cQ °o ~ 0o O .p co .p r 0 ~~ ~. I'''. ..t' ~° • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # SE REPORT # 2.63 ~J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NANZE Tz7zs • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an Agreement with Progressive Rail to close the at-grade Rail Crossing on the two frontage roads along I-494 in Richfield and Bloomington as part of the Lyndale Avenue Brid a Project. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached agreement between Progressive Rail and the City of Richfield to close the two frontage roads on both sides of I-494 in Richfield and Bloomington. n U II. BACKGROUND As part of the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project, the new bridge will be wider than the existing Lyndale Avenue Bridge. This is being done in anticipation of widening 1- 494 in the future and assuring that the new bridge can accommodate four additional lanes of traffic (two-lanes in each direction.) As part of the Lyndale Bridge Project, the widening of the bridge will require the closing of portions of the north and south frontage roads in Richfield and Bloomington. See attached map. With the closing of the frontage roads, there will no longer be a need for an at-grade railroad crossing of both frontage roads over the Progressive Rail railroad tracks. 1110Progressive Rail Agmt r .• t The proposed agreement pays Progressive Rail to remove the at-grade crossings on both I-494 frontage roads. The cost to remove both at-grade crossings is $6,200. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The closure of the frontage roads on both sides of I-494 is consistent with plans proposed for widening I-494. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Progressive Rail requires a signed agreement before it will hire a contractor to remove the at-grade rail-crossings on the 494 north and south frontage roads. C. FINANCIAL • .The total cost to remove both at-grade crossings is $6,200. State of Minnesota funds will be used to pay for this work. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement with Progressive Rail. • E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project has obtained all necessary state and federal environmental reviews. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None V. ATTACHMENTS • Agreement with. Progressive Rail including a diagram showing the location of the north and south frontage roads and their at-grade crossings with the Progressive Rail railroad tracks. VI. PRINCIl'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. • ,,~., ~~ I • AGREEMENT NO DATED October 17, 2008 STATE PROJECT 2785-342 CITY PROJECT 42000 FUNDS 100% CITY Railroad fla in and Crossin Removal I-494 North and South Frontage Roads at-grade crossing in Richfield & Bloomington ve Rail Inc THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between PROGRESSIVE RAIL, INC., (Company), and the City of Richfield. RECITALS: 1. The City has prepared plans, specifications and special provisions for S.P. 2785-342, (T.H. 494) in Richfield and Bloomington, MN (the "Project") and 2. The plans, specifications and special provisions together with "Standard Specifications for Construction," dated June 12, 2008 on file with the City, constitute the specifications for the • improvements; and 3. In order to .accommodate the Project, it will be necessary for the Company to provide flagging services for work on the North and South Frontage Roads and temporary access of Company track to clean any debris the may encroach the Company's tracks and the company is willing to do so under the terms and conditions stated; and 4. The City, by order of the City Council, is authorized to enter in to an agreement with the Company for the work and temporary access. CONTRACT: 1. EXHIBITS l.l. The State of Minnesota's "Standard Clauses for Railroad-Highway Agreements" (Standard Clauses), is attached and incorporated as Exhibit "A". Except as expressly modified, all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Standard Clauses are incorporated into this Agreement. 1.2. Exhibit "B", the location print is attached and incorporated into this agreement. • 2. WORK PERFORMANCE 2.1. At the request of the City, s furnish flagging services to 2.2. At the request of the City; s remove the at-grade crossin Bloomington. The CompaY crossings on the adjacent F~ debris removal shall be at tl 3. COST ESTIMATE 3.1. The actual cost of the project, City Funds. The City will pa described in Section 2. 3.2. The Company will be paid in 3.3. The Company shall be reimbu Section 2 of this agreement is 3.4. The City's total liability shall additional funds. The City's t amount listed above as "Total without its prior consent. 4. WORK CHANGES to the execution of the Agreement, the Company shall late the construction activities adjacent to the railroad. ~sequent to the execution of the Agreement, the Company shall on the I-494 North and South Frontage Roads in Richfield and will pile the debris directly related to the removal of the at-grade stage Roads within Mn/DOT Right-of Way. The cost of the cost of the City and its Contractor. including preliminary engineering costs, will be financed with the Company as provided herein as lump sump for all work as •dance with Article 7 of the Standard Clauses, Exhibit "A". a lump sum amount of $6,200 after all work described in increase without its approval and the encumbrance of obligation under this Agreement is limited to the total imated Cost." The City will not pay project costs incurred 4.1. If it is determined by the parts s that a change is required in work to be performed by the Company, such change will b authorized only by written amendment to this Agreement. Such amendment must be app owed and executed prior to the performance of the work involved in the change. ~ 5. TEMPORARY ACCESS 5.1. The Company hereby grants t the State the right and license to enter upon the property of the Company if necessary to colle t any debris for the purposes of the Project. The License is granted subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The License shall take effect on the Effective Date of his Agreement and shall remain in effect through December ~ ~~ • • • f r ,." t • ~'"~L ~-1 2.1. At the request of the City, subsequent to the execution of the Agreement, the Company shall furnish flagging services to accommodate the. construction activities adjacent to the railroad. 2.2. At the request of the City; subsequent to the execution of the Agreement, the Company shall remove the at-grade crossings on the I-494 North and South Frontage Roads in Richfield and Bloomington. The Company will pile the debris directly related to the removal of the at-grade ., crossings on the adjacent Frontage Roads within Mn/DOT Right-of Way. The cost of the debris removal shall be at the cost. of the City and its Contractor. 3. COST ESTIMATE 3.1. The actual cost of the project, including preliminary engineering costs, will be financed with City Funds. The City will pay the Company as provided herein as lump sump for all work as described in Section 2. . 3.2. The Company will be paid in accordance with Article.? of the Standard Clauses, Exhibit "A". 3.3. The Company shall be reimbursed a lump sum amount of $6,200 after all work described in Section 2 of this agreement is completed. 3:4. The City's total liability shall not increase without its approval and the encumbrance of 'additional funds. The City's dotal obligation under this Agreement is limited to the total amount listed above as "Total Estimated Cost." The City will not pay project costs incurred without its prior consent. 4. WORK CHANGES 4.1. If it is determined by the parties .that a change is required in work to be performed by the Company, such change will be authorized only by written amendment to this Agreement. Such amendment must be approved and executed prior to the performance of the work involved in the change. 5. TEMPORARY ACCESS 5.1. The Company hereby grants to the State the right.and license to enter upon the property of the Company if necessary to collect any debris for the purposes of the Project. The License is granted subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The License shall take • effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement and shaIl remain in effect through December ~, ~~-3 • 31, 2009 (which date maybe extended by agreement of the parties), or until the Property is no longer required for the Project, whichever occurs first. The City and its' employees, agents, and contractors shall not enter the Property until such time as the insurance required by Mn/DOT Standard Specifications for Construction, 2005, § 1505 and § 1708 is in place and has been approved by the Company. 6. ASSIGNMENT OF RECIEVABLES 6.1. Any party to this Agreement may assign any receivables due to them under this agreement, provided, however, such assignments shall not relieve the assignor of any of its rights or obligations under this agreement. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE 7.1. This Agreement shall be effective upon the date the City obtains all signatures as required. 8. SURVIVAL • 8.1. The provisions of this Agreement and all prior agreements between the. City and Company shall survive any acquisition of any interest in any of the Impacted Property by City, whether by grant by Company, through condemnation proceedings or otherwise. • ,r PROGRESSIVE RAIL INC. By: Title: Date: i i i^ f i f i f i f i f i f i f i f^ f^ f i f^ f^ f i f i f f^ i f i f i f i f i f i f i f i^ i f i f i i i^ i f i f i f i f i f 1 f i! i f i f i f i f i f i f i OF RICHFIELD By: Its: By: Its: City Manager Date: I Date: • LJ 'c, . 5E-`~ • PROGRESSIVE RAIL INC. By: Title: Date: ^li iiiiiifiiiiiEifii^iiii iii^^iiiiiiiii ^liiiiiii^ifiii;i iif iiiiiiiii ^i~ii iifiiiii iiii ii ~ - CITY OF RICHFIELD By: By: Its: Mayor Its: City Manager Date: Date: • • r~*. 'w ~~_~ EXHIBIT "A" STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & CITY OF RICHFIELD STANDARD CLAUSES FOR RAILROAD-HIGHWAY AGREEMENTS April 11, 2008 1. EFFECTIVE DATE This Agreement will become effective upon the date City obtains all signatures required. 2. CANCELLATION The City may immediately terminate this~Agreement if it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for. the payment of the services covered here.. Termination must be by written or fax notice to the Company. The City is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, the Company will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata.basis for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. The City will not be assessed any penalty if the Agreement is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source, not to appropriate funds. The City must provide the Company notice of the lack of funding within a reasonable time of the City's receiving that notice. 3. GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE Minnesota law, without regard to its choice-of--law provisions, governs this Agreement. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, will be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Hennepin County, Minnesota. 4. DATA DISCLOSURE Under Minnesota Statutes Section 270C.65, and other applicable law, the Company consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal-employer tax identification number, and/or Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to the State, to federal and state tax agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state obligations. These identification numbers maybe used in the enforcement of federal and state tax laws which could result in action requiring the Company to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any. • 5. ELIGIBILITY OF COSTS The provisions contained in Federal-Aid Policy Guide, Chapter 1, Subchapter G, Part 646, Subpart B and EXHIBIT "A" -Page 1 of 5 ~' ti. Chapterl, Subchapter B, Part 140, Subpart I apply to railway-highway project, regardless of the method of financing the project. 6. WORK REPORTS The Company will furnish the City's Engin er in charge of the project: a. "Form 21191, Minnesota De artment of Transportation, Daily Utility Report", or equivalent approved by the City's engin er showing the number of people on payroll, classification, and total hours worked; and equi went used, at a time mutually agreed upon by the Company and the State. b. Full detailed information as t~ progress of work and amount of labor and material used as of the time of request. The Company will, make other reports, keeother records and perform other work in such manner a time as maybe necessary to enable City to collect d obtain available federal aid. 7. REIMBURSEMENT The City will reimburse the Company for ac~al expenses incurred performing the work set forth in this Agreement. Payments will be made in acco dance with the following: a. City will make payments in a cordance with Minnesota Statutes § 16A.124. • b. Invoices for labor and materi is ("partial invoices") maybe submitted on a periodic basis during the term of the project, but n t more frequently than once per month. These valid partial invoices will be paid 30 days from the date they are received by the City Of Richfield. c. Partial invoices that are not a .proved due to disputed items will be returned to the Company with a request for an explanation f r any disputed items. If the dispute is resolved, the City shall pay the Company within 30 days f receiving a corrected invoice. The City may pay the non- disputed portion of any dispu ed invoice. d. Final invoices must be submi ed within 120 days of the completion of the reimbursable railroad work. Invoices submitted aft this date, and less than one (1) year after the last activity on the project will not be paid, unle good cause is shown for the delay in the submission of the invoice. In accordance with f deral regulations, 23 CFR 140.922, any final invoice received more than one (1) year after a last reimbursable railroad work will not be paid. e. Partial invoices must be base on actual (not estimated) costs incurred. Partial invoices need not be itemized, but City must be able to substantiate costs by checking the Company's records. The final invoice will be a detaile ,itemized statement.of all items of work performed by the Company, as shown in the ap ropriate exhibit or exhibits attached to this Agreement, and shall be marked "Final Invoice". f. Payment of the final invoice ill be made after City inspects and approves the work: All work will be inspected within 120 ays from receipt of the final invoice. Subsequently, the final invoice will be forwarded for udit by the City, in accordance with the requirements of state and federal laws and' regulation. he Company will keep account of its work in such a way that accounts maybe readily audit d. In the event that any amount previously paid to the company is in excess of the actual cost de ermined by audit, the Company, upon notice from the City, will • within 30 days pay to the Ci the difference. Conversely, in the event that any amount previously paid to the Comp y is less than the actual costs determined by audit, the City shall "A"-Page2of5 ~~ Chapterl, Subchapter B, Part 140; Subpart I, apply to: railway-highway project, regardless of the method of financing the project. 6. WORK REPORTS The Company will furnish the City's Engineer in charge of the project: a. "Form 21191,:Minnesota Deparfinent of Transportation, Daily Utility Report", or equivalent approved by the City's engineer showing the number of people on payroll, classification, and . total hours worked, and equipment used, at a time mutually agreed upon by the Company and the State. b. Full detailed information as to progress of work and amount of labor and material used as of the time of request. The Company will, make other reports, keep. other records and perform other work in such manner a time as may be necessary to enable City to collect and obtain available federal aid. 7. REIIVIBURSEMENT The City wi ll reimburse the Company for actual expenses incurred performing the work set forth in this Agreement. Payments will be made in accordance with the following: • a. City will make payments in accordance with. Minnesota Statutes § 16A.124. b. Invoices for labor and materials ("partial invoices") may be submitted on a periodic basis during the term of the project, but not more frequently than once per month. These valid partial invoices will be paid 30 days from the date they are received by the City Of Richfield: c. Partial invoices that are not approved due to disputed items will be returned to the Company with a request for an explanation for any disputed .items. If the dispute is resolved, the City shall pay the Company within 30 days of receiving a corrected invoice. The City may pay the non- disputed portion of any disputed invoice. d. Final invoices must be submitted within-120 days. of the completion of the reimbursable railroad work. Invoices submitted after this date, and less than one (1) year after the last activity on the project will not be_ paid, unless good cause is shown for the delay in the submssionof the invoice. In:accordance with federal regulations, 23 CFR 140.922, any final.invoice received more than one (1) year after the last reimbursable railroad work will not be paid. e. Partial invoices must be based on actual (not estimated) costs incurred. Partial invoices need not be itemized, but City must be able to substantiate costs by checking the Company's records: The final invoice will be a detailed, itemized statement.of all items of work performed by the . Company; as shown in the appropriate exhibit or exhibits attached. to this Agreement, and shall. . be .marked "Final Invoice". f. Payment of the final invoice will be made after City inspects and approves the work: All work will be inspected within 120 days from receipt of the final invoice. Subsequently, the final invoice :will be forwarded for audit by the City, in accordance with the requirements of state and federal laws and regulation. The Company will keep account of its work in -such a way. that accounts may be readily audited. In the event that any amount previously paid to the company is in excess of the actual cost determined by audit, the Company, upon notice from the City, will within 30 days pay to the City the difference. Conversely, in theevent that any amount previously paid to the Company is less than the- actual costs. determined by audit, the City shall EXHIBIT "A" -Page 2 of 5 . i ~ `ti l.~ ~~ pay the actual costs due within 30 days of the determination of the actual costs of the work. g. All invoices shall be addressed as follows: Tom Foley City of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave Richfield, MN 55423 8. WORKERS' COMPENSATION The Company certifies that it is in compliance with workers' compensation insurance coverage required by Minnesota Law, or Federal Law if the Company is subject to Federal Law which preempts the Minnesota. Law. The Company will require its contractors to present proof of coverage under the Minnesota Workers Compensation Act. The Company's employees and agents will not be considered City or State employees. Any claims arising under workers compensation laws and any claims made by a third parry as a consequence of the acts or omissions of the Company, its agents, employees or contractors are. in no way the responsibility of the City. 9. INSPECTION, STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE The Company and/or Local Agency will permit the City to inspect and approve the work performed under this Agreement during the regular working hours of the Company without prior notice. The City may refuse to • approve any and all work performed under this Agreement for failure to comply with applicable standards for work of that type. If the City fails to approve the work performed under. this Agreement, the City may refuse to make any further payments under this Agreement until the work at issue is performed in accordance with acceptable standards for work of this type and said work is approved by the City. The Company and/or Local Agency warrants that it will perform all work under this Agreement in a workmanlike and timely manner in accordance with all applicable standards for work of the type at issue. Should the work fail to be performed in a timely manner or in accordance with applicable standards, the City may immediately suspend further payments under this Agreement and the Company must repay all funds expended on unsatisfactory work. 10. OVERRUN OF ESTIMATED COSTS WITH NO WORK CHANGES If it appears to the Company, at any time subsequent to the date of this Agreement and prior to the final completion of such work, that the actual cost of the project will exceed the estimated cost, the Company must send written request for approval to the City. The request will explain the reasons for the additional costs and the amount of the costs. If City approves such request, City will encumber additional funds and then issue a notice to proceed. Any additional expenses incurred by the Company prior to receiving notice to proceed may not be reimbursed by City. State's maximum obligation under this Agreement will not exceed 120% of the estimated cost, except by afully-executed amendment to this Agreement. 13. STATE AUDITS Under Minnesota Statutes Section 16.C.05, subd. 5, the Company's books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and/or the City for a EXHIBIT "A" -Page 3 of 5 !~ minimum of six years after an appropriate required under this Agreement. official certifies the Company's completion of the construction :7 14. NONDISCRIMINATION If the Company enters into a contract with a contractor, to perform all or any portion of the Company's work set forth in this Agreement, the Company for it elf, its assigns and successors in interest, agrees that it will not discriminate in its choice of contractors and ill include all of the nondiscrimination provisions in this agreement and as set forth in "Appendix A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 15. AMENDMENTS, WAIVER, Any amendments to this Agreement must b original Agreement, or their successors in o will not constitute or be construed as, a wai Agreement contains all prior negotiations a understandings, whether written or oral, reg or to bind either or both of the parties. This which shall be deemed to be an original, but AND COUNTERPARTS in writing and executed by the same parties who executed the :ice. Failure of a party to enforce any provision of this Agreement ;r of such provision or of the right to enforce such provision. This i agreements between the Company and the City. No other rding the subject matter of this Agreement will be deemed to exist agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. • • "A"-Page4of5 ~~ U • minimum of six years after an appropriate City official certif es the Company's completion of the construction required under this Agreement. 14. NONDISCRIMINATION If the Company enters into a contract with a contractor, to perform all or any portion of the Company's work set forth in this Agreement, the Company for itself, its assigns and successors in interest, agrees that it will not discriminate in its. choice of contractors and will include all of the nondiscrimination provisions in this agreement and as set forth in "Appendix A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. 15. AMENDMENTS, WAIVER, MERGER, AND COUNTERPARTS Any amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by the same parties who executed the original Agreement, or their successors in office. Failure of a party to enforce any provision of this Agreement will not constitute or be construed as, a waiver of such provision or of the right to enforce such provision. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the Company and-the City. No other understandings, whether written or oral, regarding the subject matter ofthis Agreement will be deemed to exist or to bind either or both of the parties. This Agreement maybe executed in one or more counterparts, each of which-shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same Agreement. EXHIBIT "A" -Page 4 of 5 :~ .' ~• /// ~ C] APPENDIX A Non-Discrimination Provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor"), agrees as follows: (1) Compliance with Regulations: The Contractor will comply with Regulations of the Department of Transportation relative tonondiscrimination infederally-assisted programs ofthe Federal Highway Administration (Title 49, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 21, hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract. (2) Nondiscrimination: The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it after award and prior to completion of the contract work, will not discriminate on the ground of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The contractor will not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix "A", "B" and "C". (3) Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations eitherby competitive bidding or negotiation made by the contractor for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of the contractor's obligation under this contract and the Regulations relative to discrimination on the ground of race, color or national origin. (4) Information and Reports: The contractor will provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or orders and instructions issued pursuant thereto, and will permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such Regulations, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the contractor shall so certify the Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.. (5) Sanctions for noncompliance: In the event of contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the Department of Transportation shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the Federal Highway Administration may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to, (a) withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies, and/or (b) cancellation, termination or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part. (6) Incorporation of Provisions: The contractor will include the provisions of paragraph (1) through (6) in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations, order, or instructions issued pursuant thereto. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that, in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the State to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the State, and in addition, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such-litigation to protect the interests of the United States. • EXHIBIT "A" -Page 5 of 5 F~ . j HPT CW II PROPERTIES TRUST 351 77T~1 ST W 34-026-24=33-0086 /i ;~., , .., ---- ,... , _ .- I ._~. ~ // ~.:. - - -~ - ~ ., 1 i 1 , > ~ ... _ ....__ . T.,..a ------- __ __ .. ~i ii ~ ~. 1-494 ~--0 .... _ _ _ :. _. ....... ........ F .. \. c.,`_! f :' ~~` i- p.,\`- ~~~:' I I I J \.,/ ~~~ Removal of At-Grade Rail Crossings N n • STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # SF REPORT # 264 CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an Agreement between Center Point Energy and the City of Richfield to relocate a natural aas pipeline for construction of the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over I-494. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached agreement between Center Point Energy and the City of Richfield to relocate utilities as part of the Lvndale Avenue Bridge Over I-494 Project. II. BACKGROUND The construction of the new Lyndale Avenue Bridge over I-494 will require Center Point Energy to move a natural gas pipeline out of the way of the new bridge at an estimated cost of $23,863. Federal funds will be used to pay 100% of the cost to do this work. A map attached to this report shows the location of the natural gas pipeline on the southeast side of the bridge in Bloomington that needs to be relocated. The line serves two Bloomington businesses, Acura and Forklifts of Minnesota. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER 1110Utility RelocationAgmt-CenterPoint • The City's Comprehensive Plan identifies the need to rebuild I-494 including the Lyndale Avenue Bridge B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The agreement needs to be approved promptly so that the City can use federal funds to hire the private utility company to perform the necessary utility relocation work to keep the bridge project on schedule. C. FINANCIAL • The proposed utility relocation work will be paid for using 100% federal funds. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Construction of the Lyndale Avenue Bridge has already received all state and federal environmental approvals IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • None • V. ATTACHMENTS • Agreement between Center Point Energy and the City of Richfield to Relocate Utilities as part of the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over i-494 Project. • Layout of the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Over I-494 showing the location of the proposed relocation of the natural gas. pipeline. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. 1110Utility RelocationAgmt-CenterPoint ~~-i Prepared by the S.P. 2785-342 (T.H. 494) City of Richfield Location: Richfield/Bloomington (Payable) Utility Owner: Center Point Energy ($23,863.00) City Agreement No. 08-02 (Actual Cost) UTILITY RELOCATION AGREEMENT This Agreement is between the City of Richfield, a municipal corporation ("City"), and Center Point Energy, including its agents, contractors, and subcontractors (Utility Owner). This Agreement describes how the parties will mitigate the effects of a City construction project on the Utility Owner. RECITALS The City plans to let a contract to construct State Project Number 2785-342 (Project), on Federal Aid Interstate Highway Number 494, which is part of the National System of Interstate Highways. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) identifies the Project as Minnesota Project Number SP 157- 363-19, SP 107-415-19, SP 2785-342 in its records. The Project is located in Richfield and • Bloomington, MN.- Authorized FHWA officials have approved the Project. The Utility Owner owns and operates its fixtures and related equipment (Facilities.) within the limits of publicly owned right of way. The Facilities are within the limits of the Project. The Utility Owner must relocate the Facilities that are within the Project limits. The Utility Owner has requested reimbursement for the cost of this relocation from the State. The City requested the Utility Owner to prepare its preliminary work. Under Minnesota Statutes, section 161.46, the City may reimburse the Utility Owner for the cost of relocating its Facilities. Code of Federal Regulations, title 23, part 645, subpart A, and as amended requires a written agreement that specifies the work the Utility Owner will perform for reimbursement. This Agreement is subject to all state, federal, and other applicable laws and regulations. • Page 1 of 9 SF-~- S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 AGREEMENT I. Term/Termination A) Effective Date: This Agreement is effective on the date that the City obtains all signatures. B) Commencement of Work: Upon notice of Agreement approval, the Utility Owner must commence work according to a schedule the City's Project Engineer (Project Engineer) approves. The Project Engineer is Michael Beer, Mn/DOT, phone 952-826- 6705. C) Expiration Date: This Agreement will expire on .the date that all obligations, excluding the Utility Owner's ongoing maintenance obligation, have been satisfactorily fulfilled. D) Termination by the City: The City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, on 30 days written notice to the Utility Owner. Upon termination, the • Utility Owner will be entitled to payment, on a pro rata basis, for satisfactorily performed services. E) Survival of Terms: The following articles survive this Agreement's expiration or termination: (III) Utility Owner's Ongoing Maintenance Requirements; (V) Audits; (VI) Indemnification/Insurance; and (VIII) Governing Terms. II. Utility Owner's Duties A) Relocation: The Utility Owner must: 1) Relocate its Facilities according to: a) The terms of the Notice to Proceed letter issued by the City. b) all applicable codes and other law, including but not limited to, the Utility Owner's franchise with the City; c) The directions of the Project Engineer and the City's Utilities Engineer (Utilities Engineer); d) The plans for the utility work, which are attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A. If any changes must be made to the plans, the Utilities Page 2 of 9 ~ F-3 S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) • Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 Engineer must approve these changes in writing before the Utility Owner performs the work_to qualify for reimbursement; and e) Mn/DOT's standard construction specifications. 2) Submit one copy of the State's Application for Utility Permit, Form 2525,, including two copies of "proposed" sketches, for all Facilities within the trunk highway right of way to the State Utilities Engineer and to the City for its right of way permit before beginning relocation work. 3) Coordinate its operations with the City's contractor's (Contractor) operations and notify the Project Engineer at least two days before beginning and after completing each operational phase. 4) Stake the location and elevation of the proposed Facilities within the trunk highway right of way. The Utility Owner must not begin construction until the Project Engineer approves the location and elevation. 5) Subcontract the relocation work under the terms of an existing contract . because the Utility Owner does not have adequate staff to perform the work. If the subcontracted utility work costs $10,000.00 or more, the Utility Owner must: a) Enter into a written contract with the subcontractor for that work. The contract must include or incorporate the "Audits" clause in substantially the same form as it appears in Article (V) of this Agreement; provide a detailed breakdown of the basis for compensation; and state that there will be no "penalty" or "winding up" charges for contract termination. b) Provide copies of the contract to the City prior to its execution or before commencing work under an already executed "retainer-type" contract. 6) Accomplish the relocation work with its own equipment. If the Utility Owner's contractor must rent any equipment at a later date, it must first obtain: a) The Utilities Engineer's written approval of the equipment rental and its rental rates; and b) The Project Engineer's approval of the equipment's proposed use. 7) Complete all underground installations within the proposed roadways before • the Contractor begins the base work operations. The Utility Owner must not substitute backfilling material unless specifically authorized by the Project Page 3 of 9 5F' `~ S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) • Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 Engineer. The Utility Owner must dispose of all rejected soil material within the highway right of way as directed by the Project Engineer. The Utility Owner must mechanically compact all material replaced in the excavation. The Utility Owner must restore all drainage and slopes to the Project Engineer's satisfaction. 8) Report the work it performs each day to the Project Engineer on the State's Daily Utility Report, Form 21191, or on another form that the Project Engineer deems acceptable. The Utility Owner must submit this report to the Project Engineer no later than the day after performing the work. 9) Maintain accurate and up-to-date relocation cost records throughout the course of the Project. 10) Leave materials in place at the Project Engineer's discretion. Any materials left within the highway right of way after the Utility Owner completes its work will become, the property of the Contractor. • B) Compliance with Safety Regulations 1) The Utility Owner must comply with the safety regulations contained in Minnesota Rules, part 8810.3300 subpart 5, during all construction and maintenance operations. The Utility Owner will furnish and require each flagger to carry a copy of the current edition of the State's Field Manual, which is Part IV of the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Utility Owner must furnish each flagger with the required vest, hat, hand sign, flags, and any other necessary safety equipment. 2) The provisions of this Agreement do not relieve the Utility Owner of any legal responsibility or liability associated with the construction, operation, or maintenance of its Facilities. C) Compliance with Pollution Control Requirements 1) The Contractor installs pollution control measures according to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit (NPDES permit). Pollution control measures include silt fences, slope. stabilization measures such as seed and mulch, and any other measures the City deems necessary to comply with the NPDES permit. If the Utility Owner's work affects such pollution control. Page 4 of 9 ~~-5 S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 measures, the Utilit Owner must restore them to their original condition and to Y the Project Engineer's satisfaction. If the Utility Owner is relocating Facilities before the Contractor begins construction, the Utility Owner must work with the Project Engineer to determine if pollution control measures are necessary and how to implement them if they are. III. Utility Owner's Ongoing Maintenance Requirements A) Once construction is complete, the Utility Owner must maintain the Facilities at its own expense. The Utility Owner must follow the terms of the permit when it performs any maintenance work. B) The Utility Owner may open and disturb the trunk highway right of way without a permit in the case of an emergency that is dangerous to the public and requires immediate attention. Upon learning of an emergency, the Utility Owner must immediately notify the State Patrol. The Utility Owner must take all necessary and reasonable safety measures to protect the public and must cooperate fully with the State Patrol. In this event, the Utility Owner must request a permit from the proper • authority no later than the working day after it begins working in the right of way. IV. Payment A) Payment 1) Exhibit B, which is attached to this Agreement, is a detailed, itemized estimate of the cost of the Utility Owner's relocation work. Actual expense includes all costs attributable to design engineering and construction relocation work. Reimbursement will be based on the actual costs for work that conforms to Exhibit A. Betterment, increase in value, and salvage value derived from the relocated Facilities will not be included in this reimbursement. 2) The City will pay the Utility owner for the actual cost the Utility owner incurs performing its obligations pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not to exceed $23,863.00 (plus cost overruns that are approved pursuant to Article IV.C.) upon receiving: a) Satisfactory proof that the Facilities have been relocated to the Project Engineer's and Utilities Engineer's satisfaction; and Page5of9 5 ~. ~ S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 • b One on final, signed invoice that is supported by an itemized statement 9 of costs. An authorized representative of the Utility Owner must sign the invoice and submit the final bill to the Utilities Engineer no later than 90 days after completing the relocation. 3) The City's payment constitutes payment in full for all work the Utility Owner performs and for any and all damages, claims, or causes of action of any kind accruing to the Utility Owner because of the City's order to relocate the Facilities. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the Utility Owner reserves the right to pursue any lawful remedy it may have for tortious acts that may arise out of the relocation of the Facilities. 4) If acceptable to the Utilities Engineer, the City may process periodic billings of incurred cost without prior audit. 5) The Utility Owner will record its actual and indirect costs according to the Federal Communications Commission's work order accounting procedure. • B) Federal Reimbursement .1. Pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations, title 23, part 645, subpart A, and as amended, the federal government may reimburse the City for a portion of the relocation cost the City pays the Utility Owner. The amount of the federal reimbursement will be determined upon the City's audit of the cost the Utility Owner claims according to the Agreement. The amount the City pays the Utility Owner for its relocation must not exceed the amount on which the federal government bases its reimbursement. 2. If the amount the City pays the Utility Owner exceeds the amount on which the federal government bases its reimbursement, the Utility Owner, upon the City's request, must immediately pay the difference to the City. C) Limitation on Payment The total amount the City is required to pay the Utility Owner is limited to the amount shown in Article IV.A.2. 2) If the Utility Owner deems it necessary to perform additional work not covered by this Agreement, or anticipates costs exceeding the amount shown in Article IV.A.2., then Page 6 of 9 ~~ S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 the Utility Owner must promptly notify the Utilities Engineer, in writing, prior to performing that additional work or incurring those additional costs. The written notice must describe the nature and cost of the additional work and provide reason(s) to support the request. The Utilities Engineer may approve the request subject to the availability and encumbrance of necessary funds. If the Utility Owner performs additional work for which the City has not previously encumbered funds, the City is not obligated to pay for that work. 3) If the amount the Utility Owner requests under Article IV.C.2. does not exceed 10 percent of the amount in Article IV.A.2., the Utility Owner may begin the additional work upon notification from the City that it has approved the work and encumbered funds. The City may authorize payment of that pre-approved additional amount without amending this Agreement. 4) If the amount the Utility Owner requests exceeds 10 percent of the amount shown in Article IV.A.2., this Agreement must be amended to reflect the new cost before the City will be responsible for paying that additional cost. The City is not obligated to reimburse the Utility Owner for amount in excess of the amount for which the State or federal government will reimburse the City for the specified work. • V. Audits The Utility Owner's costs to relocate its Facilities according to this Agreement and the costs for any additions or alterations to these Facilities are subject to the City, State and federal government's examination and audit. The Utility Owner must maintain records of all disbursements for audit purposes. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 16C.05, subdivision 5, the Utility Owner's accounting books, records, documents, procedures, and practices that are relevant to this Agreement are subject to Audit for a minimum of six years after this Agreement expires. The remainder of this page was left blank intentionally. Page 7 of 9 ~~- 8 S. P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Utility Owner has caused these presents to be executed by its ,and the City have caused these presents to be executed by its duly authorized officers. UTILITY OWNER By: Its: Date: • • Page8of9 . ' r ~~~ 1 S.P. 2785-342 (T.H.494) Richfield Agreement Number 08-02 City of Richfield By: By: Its: -Mayor, Debbie Goettel Its: City Manager, Steven L. Devich Date: .' Date: Page 9 of 9 ~F- 10 N Proposed Natural Gas Relocation J STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5G REPORT # 265 CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: THOMAS FOLEY, T7tANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ry REVIEW: I~ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of replacing a stop sign on Vincent Avenue at 62nd Street with a Yield sign. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the replacement of a stop sign on Vincent Avenue at 62"d Street with a Yield si n. II. BACKGROUND A stop sign was installed on Vincent Avenue at 62"d Street in the summer of 2008 as part of the three-year program to install stop signs citywide based on the new City Stop Sign Policy. City staff anticipated that implementation of the new policy might result in difficulty for a few residents. Recently, a resident at 6205 Vincent Avenue who usually parked in front of his house received a parking ticket because it is illegal to park within 30 feet of a stop sign. A review of alternatives revealed that the Yield sign does not limit parking in close proximity to the sign. Also, the location in question involves a T-intersection that is much safer than afour-legged intersection. City staff is recommending replacement of the stop sign at this T-intersection with the Yield sign to maintain consistency with .the City's new Stop Sign Policy without 1110StopSign sacrificing safety. The Yield sign allows the resident to legally park in front of his • house. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • According to the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a Yield sign may be used instead of Stop sign if engineering judgment indicates that one of more. of the following conditions exist: "D. at in intersection where special problem exists and where engineering judgment indicates the problem to be susceptible to correction by the use of the Yield sign." • Removal of a stop sigri requires City Council approval. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The resident was concerned about the loss of on-street parking in front of his home since the installation of the new stop sign on Vincent Avenue at 62"d Street. C. FINANCIAL • A Yield sign will cost about $50 to $60 installed. Funding is provided from the Streets Maintenance Operating Budget. • D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer any questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The use of a Yield sign or a Stop sign will create adverse effects on the environment. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Move the stop sign at least 8 feet to the north. However, the sign was placed on a street light pole that may pose a sight obstruction for motorists. V. ATTACHMENTS • Map showing the T-intersection of Vincent Avenue and 62"d Street. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. r~ U ~~~i Replace Stop Sign with a Yield Sign N /V Crosstown-62 62nd Street ~ x-17' No Parking -' 3ti~ On-Street Parking ~ Allowed (1-car) No Parking -- (6205) driveway m c m Q c m c AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING tJ NOVEMBER 10, 2008 CONSENT 5H 266 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: RANDY HUGHES, OPERATIONS SUPERINTENDENT ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of approval of agreement for purchase of services between the City of Richfield and Henne in Count for Sentencin to Service STS work crews. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: approve an agreement for purchase of services between the City of Richfield and Hennepin County for Sentencing #o Service (STS) work crews in the amount of $48,000 for the year 2008. II. BACKGROUND Hennepin County Community Corrections operates the Sentencing to Service (STS) general work program, which utilizes offenders who are working off court- ordered obligations for low level offenses. The City of Richfield has utilized these forces for many years to help clean up after the Fourth of July celebration and to help with occasional labor intensive projects. In 2003, STS crews helped with the extensive storm cleanup and did an excellent job. In 2004, the City contracted with Hennepin County to have a crew work two days a week for eight months for $20,000. They were very helpful and did many projects that the reduced number of full-time staff would not have been able to accomplish. (See attached sheet.) • In 2007 the City contracted with STS for a work crew for 4 days a week for 6 months during the summer and 2 days a week for 6 months during winter for $48,000.00. The:2008 contract is a renewal of the 2007 contract with no increases. 1110STS The STS contract is normally processed earlier in the year but was overlooked this year. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City policy has been to encourage mutually beneficial joint agreements with other agencies. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • This partnership has worked very well in the past. • .Many other cities participate successfully in this program including Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Minneapolis, St. Paul, Mn/DOT and Three Rivers-Park District. C. FINANCIAL • The average work crew is eight people plus a crew leader. The net cost to the City is less than $4.80 per hour for each worker. • Funding for STS is from the Street Maintenance ($16,940), Park Maintenance ($16,940), Storm Sewer ($9,225) and Sanitary Sewer ($9,225) Budgets, line item 6315. • D. LEGAL • When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds- $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. • The City Attorney has reviewed this contract. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may choose to not approve the contract; however STS crews have provided the City with approximately 9 months of services already this year, totaling $36,660.00 dollars for which they should be compensated, even if we do not use them for the rest of the year. STS crews provide an excellent service at a very inexpensive cost that could not be obtained elsewhere. V. ATTACHMENTS • Listing of examples of Sentencing to Service work projects. • Contract for 2008. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. ~~ -) TASKS FOR "SENTENCING TO SERVICE" • Maintain City-owned vacant lots on 18th Ave. • Weed control along curb lines • Picking up trash along freeway fences and on minor arterial roads • Washing and cleaning City equipment • Clean garage stalls • Trimming along freeway fences • Weed control around ball field fences • Clean tennis courts • Clean tot lots and park trash pickup • Weed whip parks and freeway fences • Sweep slabs under bleachers • Clean and wash park buildings • 4th of July setup and cleanup • Half-Marathon setup and cleanup • Cattail Days setup and cleanup • Clean Ice Arena • Shovel gate boards • Restore and paint picnic tables • Paint park buildings • Shovel snow at bus stops and fire hydrants • Shovel debris out of catch basins • Clean under bridge decks • Paint Garage building • Cleanup trash around storm water ponds • H U B garbage • Wood chipping along 77th street wall • Rebuild retaining walls • • SN,~.-- Contract No: A082156 SERVICES AGREEMENT SENTENCING TO SERVICE PROGRAM WITH GOVERNMENTAL iJNIT This Agreement is between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA (the "COUNTY") A-2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, on behalf of the Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections and Rehabilitation, C-2300 Government Center, 300 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 ("DEPARTMENT") and the CITY OF RICHFIELD, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (the "CITY"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the County operates the Sentencing to Service Program (STS Program) which offers offenders an opportunity to learn construction and other marketable skills; and WHEREAS, the CITY wishes to purchase the services of the STS Program; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY, on behalf of the DEPARTMENT, and the CITY agree as • follows: TERM AND COST OF THE AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be in effect from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the Default and Cancellation provisions of this Agreement. The total cost of this Agreement, including all reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed forty-eight thousand dollars ($48,000.00). 2: SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED The CITY wishes to utilize the services of the STS Program participants to perform labor intensive forestry, park maintenance and utility maintenance related projects. Each STS crew will be supervised by a Hennepin County employed STS crew leader who will be responsible for transportation, instruction and supervision of the crew for quality work performance and job safety. STS program participants are not employees of the CITY (the "Work"). The DEPARTMENT agrees to the following with respect to the Work requested: A. Provide four (4) work crews four (4) days per week for the period of May 1, 2008 through October 31, 2008. Provide two (2) work crews two (2) days per-week for the period of November 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008. Provide work crews for a (Gov Unit Svcs Agr City of Richfield 10/27/2008) V' V l rV minimum of six (6) hours per day, excluding paid breaks. A work crew will • consist of a minimum of eight (8) participants per day, excluding the crew leader. B. Provide COUNTY employed crew leader who will be responsible for transportation, instruction and supervision of the STS Program work crew. C. Provide required •personal safety equipment and clothing needed for specific work. D. Provide basic construction tools and equipment needed for specific work. E. Train each STS Program work crew in necessary safety principles and techniques. F. Provide quarterly reports to the CITY that show the number of days worked and total hours of service received. G. Assume all medical liability for the STS Program participants. 3. RESPONSIBLITIES OF THE CITY The CITY agrees to the following: • A. Obtain all necessary permits or licenses or special authority for all Work. B. Assign all work and coordinate material purchases and delivery for projects to be ,performed. 4. COST AND PAYMENT FOR SERVICES A. The CITY shall pay the COUNTY forty-eight thousand dollars ($48,000.00) annually for the services described in this Agreement. B. Payment for services performed by the COUNTY shall be paid by the CITY within thirty (30) days from the date of invoice. The COUNTY will invoice for services quarterly. 5. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Nothing is intended or should be construed as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties or as constituting either party as the agent, representative, or employee of the other party for any purpose. Each party is and shall remain an independent contractor for all services performed under this Agreement. Each party shall secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any personnel or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services required by a party will have no contractual relationship with the other party and will not be considered employees of the other party. (Gov Unit Svcs Agr City of Richfield 10/27/2008) 2 51~~'~ 6. INDEMNIFICATION Each parry agrees that it will be responsible and agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other parry, its officials, officers, agents, and employees for its own errors, acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by the law and shall not be responsible for. the errors, acts and omissions of the other party and the results thereof. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Section 6, neither party shall be liable` to the other for any cause under or related to this Agreement for any consequential, special, incidental, punitive, or indirect damages (including without limitation loss of profit, revenue, business opportunity or business advantage), whether based upon a claim or action of tort, contract, warranty, negligence, strict liability, contribution or any other legal theory or cause of action. Each parry's liability shall be governed by and limited in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. 7. DATA PRACTICES Both parties shall abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 (MGDPA), and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, regulations and orders relating to data privacy and confidentiality. 8. SUBCONTRACTING AND ASSIGNMENTS Neither party shall assign, subcontract, transfer or pledge this Agreement, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the'other party. 9. MERGER AND MODIFICATION A. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter. All items that are referenced or that are attached are incorporated and made a part of this Agreement. B. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this. Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties. 10. DEFAULT AND CANCELLATION A. If either party fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement or so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of the Agreement, it shall be in default. Unless the default is excused by the nondefaulting party, the nondefaulting party may upon written notice immediately cancel this Agreement in its entirety. Additionally, failure of the CITY to comply with the terms of this • Agreement shall be just cause for the COUNTY to immediately cease providing services under this Agreement until'the CITY's compliance. (Gov Unit Svcs Agr City of Richfield 1 012 7/2 0 0 8) 5f-1 ~(~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AUTHORIZATION COUNTY OF HENNEPIN Reviewed by the County STATE OF MINNESOTA Attorney's Office Date: By: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Date: CITY OF RICHFIELD The CITY warrants that the persons who executed this Agreement are authorized to do so on behalf of the CITY as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions or ordinances. n ~J By: Debbie Goettel, Mayor Date: By: Steven L. Devich, City Manager Date: • City organized under: Statutory Option A (Gov Unit Svcs Agr City of Richfield 10/27/2008) 5 Option B Charter ~. • COUNTY BOARD AUTHORIZATION Reviewed by the County Attorney's Office COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA Date: By: Chair of Its County Board ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of County Board Date: And: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator Date: CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Debbie Goettel Its: M_ ayor Date: And: Steven L. Devich Its: City Manager Date: • City organized under: Statutory Option A Option B Charter (Gov Unit Svcs Agr City of Richfield 10/27/2008) 6 • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5I REPORT # 26] ~- STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 • REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: RICHARD REGNIER, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the continuation of the plumbing and mechanical inspections and code enforcement contract with the City of Bloomington for provision of inspection services for Richfield for the ear 2009. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached contractual agreement with the City of Bloomington to provide various types of plumbing and mechanical inspections and code enforcement for the City of Richfield for the r 2009, with changes in costs. II. BACKGROUND The City of Bloomington has provided inspection and enforcement services in the areas of plumbing, heating and air conditioning for many years. The proposed contract for 2009 for plumbing, heating and air conditioning inspection services will be $105,900, compared to the 2008 contract amount of $102,310. This figure reflects a 3.5% increase in charge to the City of Richfield. The contract presented to the Council on 11/10/08 is for one year only. • The terms of the contract provide for the contract to be terminated upon the expiration of 30 days after the service of written notice upon the other party, if there should be a need to terminate it before it expires December 31, 2009. 1110 Bloomington Plumbing & Mechanical Inspections Contract for 2009 III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Bloomington has provided, inspection and enforcement services in the areas of plumbing, heating and air conditioning for many years. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City of Bloomington has sufficient resources to provide a professional level of inspection services to Richfield residents. Annual evaluations of .their services have shown that they are providing efficient services in a cost-effective manner. C. FINANCIAL • The cost of this contract will be recovered by permit fee revenue. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • • The Council could decide to have Richfield provide its own plumbing, heating and air conditioning. services. The cost of hiring the staff necessary to provide the same level of services and administrative support would be more than current expenditures and would require a budget increase. • The Council could decide to compensate the City of Bloomington at a lower rate that would require designated reductions in services or programs. V. ATTACHMENTS • 2009 City of Bloomington Inspections contract. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~~~ • AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this day of , 2009, by and between the City of Richfield (hereinafter referred to as "Richfield") and the City of Bloomington (hereinafter referred to as "Bloomington"). WHEREAS, Richfield is authorized and empowered to provide for various types of building inspections and code enforcement to ensure the public health, welfare and safety; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the parties and the purpose of this agreement that certain of such services be performed by Bloomington on behalf of Richfield; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, the above parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The term of this agreement shall be from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, subject to termination as provided in paragraph 7. • 2. For the .term of this- agreement, Bloomington shall provide Richfield with the following services, in and on behalf of Richfield: a. Plumbing inspections and code enforcement as necessary. b. Plumbing plan review for permits with a job cost less than $50,000. c. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning inspections, plan review and code enforcement for new and existing residential structures and commercial/industrial applications. 3. Bloomington shall have control over the manner in which the inspections, plan review and code enforcement activities are conducted and over the determination of what enforcement action is appropriate and consistent with Richfield City Code Section 400 and other policies as established by the City of Richfield 4. Bloomington shall assume the expense of performing the inspections and code enforcement. • ~~ 5. In 2008, Richfield shall pay Bloomington the sum of ONE HUNDRED FIVE • THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($105,900)-for services provided pursuant to paragraph two of this agreement. One-half of-this amount shall be due on June 30, 2009, and the remainder shall be due on November 30, 2009. 6. In addition to the services and compensation in Paragraph 2 and 5 above, Bloomington shall provide Richfield with plumbing plan review for permits with a job cost of $50,000 or more. Richfield will pay Bloomington a plumbing plan review fee of 10% of the total plumbing permit fee on permits with a job cost of $50,000 or greater. The plumbing plan review fee will be paid to Bloomington within 30 days after the plumbing permit is issued by Richfield. Such plumbing plan review fees shall be separate from, and in addition to, the payment provided for by Paragraph 5 of this agreement. All other provisions of this agreement shall remain applicable with respect to the plumbing plan review and inspection services being provided. fn January 2010, Richfield will provide Bloomington a report listing plumbing permits issued, the job cost of each permit, and plumbing plan review fees paid to Bloomington. • 7. This agreement shall terminate as follows: a. Upon the expiration of 30 days after service of written notice upon the other party; or b. At any time, upon agreement of the parties; or c. In any event on December 31, 2009. 8. In the event of a termination prior to December 31, 2009, a prorata reduction of the compensation owed by Richfield to Bloomington shall occur which reflects the period remaining on the agreement at the time of termination. 9. Bloomington agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Richfield, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Bloomington's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of • property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Bloomington.. This provision shall not 5.~~ 3 be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses, immunities or limitators on • liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 10. Richfield agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Bloomington, and its officials, agents and employees from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from Richfield's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, action, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to the injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Richfield. This provision shall not be construed as a waiver by either party of any defenses,. immunities or limitators on liability with respect to claims made by third parties. 11. Bloomington shall carry liability insurance in the amount of at least $300,000 per individual and $1,000,000 per occurrence. Bloomington shall carry property damage liability insurance in the amount of $100,000. Richfield shall be named as an additional insured, and a certificate of said insurance shall be provided to Richfield. Bloomington • shall carry Worker's Compensation Insurance as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.181, Subd. 2 and further agrees to provide a certificate of said insurance to the Richfield. 12. Any employee assigned by Bloomington to perform its obligations hereunder shall remain the exclusive employee of Bloomington for all purposes including, but not limited to, wages, salary and employee benefits. 13. In addition to the services listed in Paragraph 2 above, Bloomington shall, upon request, also provide for and on behalf of Richfield: a. Electrical inspection and code enforcement services; b. Building inspection and code enforcement services. 14. Such services shall be paid for by Richfield on an hourly basis at the rate of $60.00 per hour, and said hourly rate shall be separate from, and in addition to, the payment provided for by Paragraph 5 of this Agreement. All other provisions of this • Agreement shall remain applicable with respect to the electrical and heating, ventilation and air conditioning inspection services being provided. ~~ 1 15. In addition to the services listed in Paragraph 2 above, Bloomington shall, upon • request, also provide building plan checking services for and on behalf of Richfield. Such services shall be paid for by Richfield on an hourly basis at a rate of $65.00 per hour, and said hourly rate shall be separate from, and in addition to, the payment provided for by Paragraph 5 of this Agreement. All other provisions of this Agreement shall remain applicable with respect to the building plan checking services being provided. 16. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting the persons employed by Bloomington as the agent, representative or employee of Richfield for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Bloomington is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this contract. Bloomington represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this contract. Any and all personnel of Bloomington or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Bloomington under this contract, and shall not be • considered employees of Richfield, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Bloomington, its officers, agents contracts or employees shall in noway be the responsibility of Richfield; and Bloomington shall defend, indemnify and hold Richfield, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be ,entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from Richfield, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensations, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. 17. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of Bloomington • relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by Richfield and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subd. 5. sr-5 18. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Bloomington and • Richfield and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof, any amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. 19. Bloomington and Richfield agree to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act and not to discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in-all services, programs, and activities. Bloomington has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as required by Section 35.107 of the U:S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. For information contact Human Services Division, City of Bloomington, 1800 West Old • Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431; telephone: 952/563-8700; TDD: 563- 8740. Richfield agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Bloomington from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Richfield. Bloomington agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Richfield from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA by Bloomington. 20. The City of Bloomington and the City of Richfield agree to submit all claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be conducted through the Mediation Center, 1536 Hewitt Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55104. The parties hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non-binding. If the parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non-binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and may commence such action prior to the • expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. 5,~~ 21. Both parties agree to comply with all applicable state, federal and local laws, rules and regulations. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands on the day and year . first written above. Upon proper execution, this Agreement shall be a legal and binding obligation upon the City of Bloomington City Attorney CITY OF BLOOMINGTON By: Its-Mayor By~ Its City Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Its Mayor By: Its City Manager r~ U • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # SJ REPORT # 268 ~~. STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN ,ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the renewal of pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses for 2009 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. and University Cash Company, LLC d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approval of a public hearing to be held December 9, 2008, for the renewal of pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses for 2009 for: • Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc.; and, • University Cash Company, LLC d/b/a Avi's Pawn and Jewelry. II. BACKGROUND The pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses will expire on January 1, 2009. Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. The renewal process has been initiated. Holding the public hearing on December 9, 2008 will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2009. 1110 Set PH for Pawnbroker and .Second Hand Goods License Renewals III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer license renewals. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing process. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL 1V~EETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5K REPORT # 2Ci9 R ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the renewal of on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for 2009 for Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill, Naviya's Thai Restaurant, Patricks Bakery & .cafe, and The Noodle Shop -Colorado, Inc., d/b/a Noodles and Company. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Council approval of a public hearing to be held December 9, 2008, for the renewal of on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for 2009 for: • .Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant; • Thompson's Fireside Pizza; • Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC d/b/a Chipotle Mexican Grill; • Naviya's Thai Restaurant; • Patrick's Bakery & Cafe; and, • The Noodle Shop -Colorado, Inc. d/b/a Noodles and Company. • II. BACKGROUND The on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for restaurant establishments will expire on January 1, 2009. 1110 Set PH for Wine and Malt Liquor License Renewals Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. . The renewal process has been initiated. Holding the public hearing on December 9, 2008 will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2009. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license renewals. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing process. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • • STAFF REPORT i ~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 2008 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CONSENT 5L 270 REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAME Tr7zE • DEPARTMENT DIlZECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: 11r,1V11'Vlt I..VV1Vt.1L l_.lJ1VO1LL'1\L'~11V1V. Consideration of the renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for 2009 for Khan's Mongolian Barbeque, Champps Operating Corporation d/b/a Champp's Restaurant, Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435, Fred Babcock VFW Post No. 5555 d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink, Don Pablo's Operating Corporation d/b/a Don Pablo's, Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar, The Frenchmans, Taco Morelos, Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant; and Richfield Hotel Associates d/b/a Ramada Inn and setting date of public hearing. By Motion: LApprove a public hearing to be held December 9, 2008, for the. renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for 2009 for: • Khan's Mongolian Barbeque; . • Champps Operating Corporation d/b/a Champp's Restaurant; • Minneapolis-Richfield American Leggion Post 435; • Fred Babcock VFW Post No. 5555 d1b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink; • Don Pablo's Operating Corporation d/b/a Don Pablo's; • Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar; • The Frenchmans; • Taco Morelos; • Jun Bo Chinese Restaurant; and, • Richfield Hotel Associates d/b/a Ramada Inn. • 1110 Set PH far Intoxicating and Sunday Liquor License Renewals • II. BACKGROUND The on-sale liquor licenses for restaurant establishments will expire on January 1, 2009. Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered. The renewal process has been initiated. Holding the public hearing on December 9, 2008 will provide ample time to complete the licensing process before January 1, 2009. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all liquor license renewals. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A • C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the licensing process. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. .PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~- STAFF REPORT OTHER BUSINESS 271 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER lU, 2UU8 REPORT PREPARED BY: L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NamtE • REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of City Council approval of an agreement for services with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for Certified Building Performance Standards & Consulting for the new Police/Fire/City Hall facility in an amount not to exceed $152,500. II. BACKGROUND The City Council voted at the October 28, 2008 meeting to engage the services of Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for Certified Building Performance Standards and related consulting for the new Police/Fire/City Hall facility. Staff was directed to prepare an agreement for those services with Orfield Labs and bring it to the City Council for approval in November. .Since the October28 City Council meeting, the City Manager met with Steve Orfield and Wes Chapman to discuss such an agreement for services. In essence, the preparation of the Building Performance Standards is a flat rate of $27,500. Those standards then become the property of the City and could be used for other City projects with minor modifications. Similarly, Orfield labs flat fee for verification testing to determine that the Performance Standards .have been met is $25,000: The variable cost associated with this agreement is the consulting services provided by Orfield Labs in assisting the City and architect to attain the targeted Performance Standards for the building. 11100rfieldLabs For these services, Orfield Labs would charge an hourly rate based upon which • staff member from Orfield Labs is providing the service. In no event, would these costs exceed $100,000. Hours incurred would be billed to the City in monthly increments so that it would be easier to manage this portion of the agreement to ensure the services stayed below the authorized limit. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY ' • If the City is to contract with Orfield Labs for this service, City Council approval and authority for such an agreement is necessary. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The~timing of this agreement is important in that Performance Standards need to be in place as a first step in the new city hall project. C. FINANCIAL • The cost of the Orfield Labs agreement would be paid for out of the design contingency portion of the budget for the new city hall (approximately $1.39 million) decreasing that contingency amount accordingly . D. LEGAL • The City attorney will review the agreement prior to execution. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • ~ Certified Building Performance Standards are sensitive to green issues associated with building construction. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The City Council could decide not to approve this agreement or to approve it for a lesser amount. V. ATTACHMENTS • Orfield Laboratories, Inc. Proposal. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • •~ • • ©e$f~n R ~~0~'~~i ~~~ c~ ~ ~~~~,~~~ °o ~ ~`~'°~ '~~~ . ~~ ~~ m PREPARED FOR '~ Mr. Steve Devich ~~~,~ City Manager ~ City of Richfield 6525 James Ave. South Richfield, MN 55423 Phone: (612) 861-9702 Email: sdevich@ci.richfield.mn.us PROJECT Certified Building Performance Standards & Consulting (CBPS) Category: Offices -Pro-Forma Proposal PREPARED BY Steven J. Orfield, President Orfield Laboratories Staff Orfield Laboratories, Inc. 2709 East 25th Street Minneapolis, MN 55406 Email: steve@orfieldlabs.com Phone: (612) 721-2455 Fax: (612) 721-2457 The following pro-forma proposal is a proposal for the development of a building performance standards package, and for consulting to assist with the design and to verify final performance. November 4, 2008 • • Project CEPS Program Cheat Richfield City Hall PROJECT INTENT Most institutions and corporations construct buildings without requiring specific building performance standards; when tested, most of those projects have significant failures, when compared to occupant-based standards like CBPS. Building performance is about human perceptual, comfort, and it is directly related to occupant satisfaction. The failure of building performance is the source of most occupant complaints about buildings. Although the science of building performance has been practiced for over 30 years, less than one percent of office buildings are exercises in these standards. When performance standards are not used, the client takes possession of their new building (or moves into a leased space) which has predicable problems in: 1. Daylighting 2. Lighting 3. Acoustics 4. Thermal Comfort 5. Indoor Air Quality Orfield Laboratories has, for over 30 years, provided custom programs to define these standards, and we have now developed a program to provide more comprehensive standards, which are updated every year at a limited) cost to the client. It has been our experience that applying a building performance program has little impact on the cost of the building in question, but it has great impact on the performance and satisfaction from the building, itself. When combined with a pre and post occupancy study program, it will allow for achievement of performance targets as well as measurement of the benefit of those targets to the occupant population in question. Since the achievement of high quality building performance has been documented over many local and national projects, it is clear that this type of program takes the burden of performance from the client and puts it where it belongs, with the design and construction team. When the project is ready to open and be performance commissioned, a set of standardized measurements will confirm what standards have been met and which have not, and the design/construction team will have to resolve those that are not at no cost to the client, and with whatever reasonable penalties the client chooses to put into their contract. Qrlietd Laboratories lac f t • project CBPS Program Clierk Richfield City Hall STANDARDS This proposal includes the development of initial standards for a set of building performance issues: Orfietd Laboratories tnC 1. Acoustics i 2. Daylighting 3. Lighting 4. Thermal Comfort i 5. Indoor Air Quality i ;The project will include sample design approaches that are useful in obtaining ;the requisite standards, and it will include specific test and measurement j standards that will be used by Orfield Labs to confirm that the Standards are ?maintained. It will also include suggestions for penalties for failure and expense to vendor and designers for failure. j An optional process which could be included now or later is the development • of an architectural interview and hiring process, which would help in eliminating those firms which are not oriented to building performance or to team-based ;design. ;CBPS CONSULTING SUPPORT Orfield Labs will provide consulting support to the design team to assist them, within the areas we practice, with designing the facility to be in compliance with the standards. This will include consulting assistance in: 1. Acoustics 2. Daylighting 3. Lighting This will include advisory assistance to understand these standards: 1. Thermal Comfort 2. Indoor Air Quality This assistance is based on a budget of $100,000 in consulting, testing and meeting time. This time is based on normal hourly rates and normal testing costs, and is time limited to those hourly limits. ~J • Prcsject CBPS Program Client Richfield City Hall CBPS PERFORMANCE COMMISSIONING Orfield Labs will provide performance commissioning to the design/client team to verify, within the areas we practice, that the completed facility meets the CBPS standards in accordance with the testing included in the standards document. This will include performance commissioning in: 1. Acoustics 2. Daylighting 3. Lighting 4. Thermal Comfort 5. Indoor Air Quality OCCUPANCY STUDIES Many clients decide not to employ CBPM occupancy studies and later would like to have that information. Orfield Labs will, at no cost to the client, provide basic data gathering and measurement for these studies, and the client may later chose to include them in their study as formal or informal processes, and will then be required to pay a set of quoted costs. Orfield Labs can only use this information anonymously within its own project data base. SCHEDULE Project schedule for the Building Performance Standards project is about 3 weeks for the standards document, assistance in Schematic, DD phase and CD phases and testing of completed building project. CLIENT -ARCHITECT AGREEMENT Building performance projects normally include the CBPS standards in the agreement with the architect, and the City Council, in conjunction with the City Staff, determine what recourse is to be available if performance has measured levels of failure. This often includes recourse for delays of occupancy, delays of remediation, inability to remediate, etc. While Orfield Labs provides expert testimony in the fields in which we practice, OL does not advise on the issues of contract administration. It is suggested that the City of Richfield consult with their staff-and outside counsel regarding this set of issues. Orfield Laboratories Inc • • . 4 Project CBPS Program _... Client Richfield City Hall FEES All fees are billed as quoted on a flat fee basis, unless otherwise noted. Billings are on 1-month intervals and are due in 30 days; work may be suspended for non-payment, and full payment must precede testimony. Any services not offered but requested will be quoted for approval. Expenses noted in the following section, reimbursement of expenses, are additional to the fees quoted and are charged including a 20% processing/handling fee. Interest rates on unpaid balances are accumulated at the rate of 2% per month on outstanding balances. Any collection costs are the obligation. of the client. Billings are due upon completion of monthly contract work and not upon execution of the project for which that work was intended. This project is quoted on a set-fee basis as follows: (Fees are based on hourly rates of $175-$250 for consulting efforts and $250-$350 for legal consulting). Higher figures are for Steven Orfield. In the case of legal consulting, the client agrees to indemnify Orfield Labs from any legal claims or judgments related to this project.) This project is quoted on a set-fee basis derived from time and systems employed as follows: Task 1 -Building Performance Standards $27,500 a. Acoustics Standards b. Daylighting and Glazing Standards c. Lighting Standards d. Thermal Comfort Standards e. Indoor Air Quality Standards Task 2 -Building Performance Consulting to comply with CBPS standards $100,000 Task 3 -Verification testing to determine that CBPS Standards have been meet $25,000 The quoted fees represent hourly charges, plus laboratory time and lab facilities, where required. Lab time and testing equipment charges generally are under 20% of total costs. These systems are covered under pending patents. The client will retain the right to use this consulting work internally. Included in this project is a license to employ these concepts within this facility. Orfield Laboratories fnc • . ~ ~ • U project CBPS Program ... Client Richfield City Hall REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES All expenses are billed at cost + 10% and may include: All meetings at client location or Orfield Labs Delivery of plans or correspondence /Postage Document copies and reproduction Airline Tickets /Ground transportation - NA Overnight accommodations, if required -NA Auto expenses @ .50/mile Special equipment (if approved} Other incurred expenses DOCUMENTS Our design work requires a set of documents drawn to conventional scale (1/4, 1/8, 1/16) that are available from our client at no cost. The documents must be in the same scale and accompanying specifications must also be easily available. It is assumed that these documents are accurate and this accuracy is the responsibility of the client. Specific documents requested at the commencement of this project are: 1. Architectural floor plan X 2. Interior furnishings/design plan X 3. Reflected ceiling plan X 4. HVAC plan X 5. Interior wall elevations X 6. Architectural spec set X 7. Lighting specifications X 8. Information from client and design team X Additional information will be requested as the project proceeds. Qrfield Laboratories inc • ~ .r • ~~~~~ II Plaject CBPS Program __ Ctierst Richfield City Hall Orfield Laboratar~es inc DESIGN TEAM The design team consists of the client, Orfield Labs as the Building Performance consultant, the client's architect, interior design team and engineering team. This project will have involvement from many members of different organizations; although OL will be pleased to discuss the project with.. these organizations, the consulting involvement of OL is directly provided to the Client and OL assumes no responsibility for direction and control of other organizations, such as architects, interior designers and engineering professionals. COMMON DELIVERABLES FOR THIS PROPOSAL Deliverables include; 1. A report of approximately 50-60 pages which details the issues, standards, examples of correct application (where possible), testing standards, and penalties for failure to meet standards. 2. Consulting assistance to comply with CBPS Standards, which includes memos, conversations, teleconferences, drawings and sketches and other written and verbal communication. 3. Performance Commissioning to confirm that the final building meets the building performance standards. EXCLUSIVITY OF CONCEPTS/PLAN Orfield Laboratories, Inc. and the client are entering into an agreement for a period of joint development of building performance solutions. This process employs analysis methods that Orfield Laboratories has developed previously and uses on an ongoing basis for evaluation and task performance analysis. Based on these methods, a specific analysis and plan are being developed exclusively for the client. These analysis methods and the right to use these methods outside of this application are the sole property of Orfield Laboratories. The right to use any information derived from this study is granted for the client via this contract. Disclosure of standards to third parties not involved in this project will incur total cost of the program per disclosure. The CBPS standards are copyright protected by Orfield Labs, and OL grants the right to the client to use them on this project. The independent design team may only use these CBPS standards on this project. • . ~ ~ '~-. • Project CBPS Program Ciient Richfield City Hall CONSULTING SERVICES The services offered are design services and are not services in the fields of architecture or professional engineering. The fields of acoustical, lighting, daylighting and AV consulting are not recognized under any professional. registration practice. Any services needed in those areas related to our work are the specific responsibility of the client and are not offered by Orfield Laboratories, Inc. EXCLUDED SERVICES The City Council Chamber is a special consulting process, normally requiring acoustical, daylighting, lighting and AV modeling and technical consulting. This is not a building performance process but rather a custom design of a meeting facility. While some CBPS standards can be used in this facility (thermal comfort, indoor air quality), others need to be reoriented to a large meeting space (acoustics, lighting, daylighting, A-V). These services can be quoted separately, if desired, but they are not included in this building performance project. ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE & VIBRATION Environmental assessments are not uncommon to define the exposure of a building to exterior noise. Environmental noise is not considered a part of this project; if desired, OL can measure and assess this site to determine if there should be any environmental response to noise and/or vibration from this site, including transportation and aircraft noise. LEGAL CONSULTING SERVICES Orfield Labs, at its option, may provide legal consulting on this project, if requested by the Client. If a legal. consulting project is accepted, the Client shall pay Orfield Labs at its legal rates for all consultant work completed, including depositions for both sides, and Orfield Labs will be indemnified in writing by the Client for all legal risks. If a legal project is not accepted and Orfield Labs is subpoenaed by any party or brought into the legal process by the any party, the Client shall pay all consulting fee and costs and will indemnify Orfield Labs. While services offered are considered to be state of the art in approach, any specific stipulations as to the performance of particular designs must be stated by the client, or no stipulations are assumed to be present. Client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless Orfield Labs from any claims and damages arising out of or associated with this Proposal, including any claims related to defective goods or services. CHOICE OF LAW '~r Orfietd Laboratcutes tnc Minnesota law shall govern this Proposal and any disputes brought hereunder. q+ r r • • ARBITRATION Project CBPS Program _. _. ~I;e,~ Richfield City Hall ;All disputes relating to this proposal or the services described herein shall be :resolved in final and binding arbitration in Minneapolis, Minnesota pursuant to ;the Minnesota Uniform Arbitration Act, Minn. Stat. 572.08, et seq. The parties shall appoint a single arbitrator to resolve the dispute. If the parties cannot 'agree on an arbitrator, either party may apply to the Chief Judge of Hennepin County District Court to appoint an arbitrator. If Orfield Labs receives an award in arbitration, Client shall pay Orfield Labs' costs, arbitration fees and attorneys' fees. If both Client and Orfield Labs receive an award, the arbitrator may apportion costs, arbitration fees and attorneys' fees 'among the parties. If Client brings a claim against Orfield Labs and does not receive an award, Client shall pay Orfield Labs' costs, arbitration fees and ;attorneys' fees. In resolving any dispute, the arbitrator must provide a written opinion of the facts ?and conclusions of law and follow applicable Minnesota law and judicial precedent. In arbitration, only actual damages, to the limit of this contract, may ~ be awarded. We look forward to the possibility of working with you on this project, and we hope that this particular consulting experience will support the view that there are substantial benefits to be derived through the. use of specialized consulting services. PROPOSAL ACCEPTANCE Steven J. Orfield, President Orfield Laboratories, Inc. Date: Steve Devich, City Manager City of Richfield Date: OrHeld LaboratA(ie5 inC •