Loading...
01-13-09 AgendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2009 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:00 P.M. AGENDA Call to order Roll call 1. Discussion regarding renaming 77th Street in Richfield (Council Memo No. 5) Notes: . Adjournment r......... r ................. /C.......... 7~ l~,'........................................................ 1~'7~f7r'A'7~"iCY~"A' f. ~. 1~. 1. t. ~. /. /. /. ..X..X..X......X..X..........AXXA.. J~..........1Y'!F'k ........... . . . .. . . . .. . REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 7:00 P.M. _ AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Oath of office to City Council Member Pat Elliott, Ward 1 Oath of office to City Council Member Fred Wroge, Ward 2 Oath of office to City Council Member Tom Fitzhenry, Ward 3 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 Counci! must have registered prior to the meeting, Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of (1) Special City Council Meeting of December 1, 2008; (2) Special City Council Meeting of December 1, 2008; (3) Regular City Council Meeting of December 9, 2008; (4) Special City Council Meeting of December 17, 2008; (5) Special City Council Meeting/City Hall Advisory Task Force III Meeting of December 18, 2008; (6) Special City Council Worksession of December 30, 2008; and (7) Special City Council Meeting of December 30, 2008 PRESENTATIONS 1. Recognition of out-going City Council Member Susan Rosenberg, Ward 1 2. Recognition of out-going City Council Member Bill Kilian, Ward 3 • 3. Presentation of Minnesota Public Works Association Hugo G. Erickson Award to Richfield Public Works Director Mike Eastling . COUNCIL DISCUSSION 4. Council discussion • Proposed Federal Economic Recovery Package • Hats Off to Hometown Hits Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 5. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 6. 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 first reading of ordinance amending Richfield City Code Section 544 related to exterior lighting and telecommunication tower and antenna standards S.R. No. 1 . B. Consideration of approval of resolution regarding City Council Member attendance at City Council meetings for 2009 S.R. No. 2 C. Consideration of approval of designating available Department Director or Assistant to the City Manager as Acting City Manager in 2009 in event City Manager is absent from City S.R. No. 3 D. Consideration of approval of resolution designating for Richfield Sun-Current as official newspaper for City of Richfield for 2009 S.R. No. 4 E. Consideration of approval of resolution designating official depositories, including approval of collateral, for City of Richfield for 2009 S.R. No. 5 F. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing use of City credit card by City employees otherwise authorized to make purchases on behalf of City S.R: No. 6 G. Consideration of approval of resolution amending joint powers agreement extending Richfield's contract through State of Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Justice Programs, with Metro Gang Strike Force through 2009 and accepting. additional grant funds for officer on strike force S.R. No. 7 H. Consideration of approval resolution accepting donation of donation of permanent sidewalk easement at 6320 Lyndale Avenue S.R. No. 8 I. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing staff submission of application for Housing and Urban Development Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds in amount not to exceed $1,500,000 through Hennepin County and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency S.R. No. 9 J. Consideration of approval of hiring Braun Intertec to provide construction materials testing services for 66th Street and Portland Avenue project S.R. No. 10 K. Consideration of approval of ratifying supplemental agreement No. 3 with Shafer Contracting related to 66th Street and Portland Avenue project S.R. No. 11 L. Consideration of approval of additional work from WSB & Associates for construction inspection services for 6300 block of Lyndale Avenue reconstruction project in amount of $11,300 S.R. No. 12 M. Consideration of approval of amendment to existing work order for WSB & Associates to continue providing construction engineering services on Lyndale Avenue bridge over I-494 project in amount of $20,000 S.R. No. 13 Notes: 7. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: RESOLUTION • 8. Consideration of resolution receiving 2009 alley paving project preliminary report and scheduling public hearing for February 24, 2009 Staff Report No. 14 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 9. Consideration of designating Mayor Pro Tempore for 2009 Staff Report No. 15 Notes: 10. Consideration of designating Council Member(s) to attend March 2009 National League of Cities Congressional Conference; July 2009 N.O.I.S.E. Conference; and November 2009 National League of Cities Congress of Cities Conference Staff Report No. 16 Notes: • 11. Consideration of renewal of contracts with certain social service agencies for 2009 Staff Report No. 17 Notes: 12. Consideration of designating Council liaison appointments to various metropolitan agencies and city advisory commissions for 2009 Staff Report No. 18 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 13. City Manager's report • • Minnesota Department of Agriculture eradication efforts for Gypsy Moth infestation on west side of Richfield (Council Memo No. 6) Notes: 14. 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: 15. 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. • • ~ Januar~2009 ~ City of Richfield 12 6:00 PM Advisory Board of Health 19 7:00 PM Human Rights Commission 13 6:00 PM Special City Council Worksession 6:30 PM Charter Commission ~~ 7:00 PM City Council ..~,1, Meeting 20 7:00 PM Transportation Commission 14 21 New Year's Day (City Hall closed) 15 4:30 PM FOWL Board @ WLNC 7:00 PM Friendship City Commission 22 SATURDAY, JANUARY 10 8:30 AM Special City Council Meeting (Commission interviews} 16 23 5:30 PM Hearing Examiner in Heredia Room '• • ;. ~ 7:00 PM Celebrations Commission 8:00 AM Special City Council Worksession •~ 6:00 PM Special HRA Worksession ~ • • ' @ Community Center Annual Goalsetting in Council Chambers ~ Martin Luther King Jr. Day 7:00 PM HRA Meeting SATURDAY, JANUARY 24 ', (City Hall Closed) 7:00 PM Community Services Co- mmission @ Cmty. Ctr. ~' 9:3U -3:3U Remodeling Fair @ Richfield High School 26 27 28 29 30 7:00 PM Planning ~~ 7:00 PM City Council SATURDAY, JANUARY 31 ' Commission ~ ~. Meetin g s Hour: 9:30-10:30 AM Ma or y i Special City Council Meeting @ Wood Lake Nature Center ! Commission Interviews Executive Conference Room (Time TBD} 5 6 7 8 9 • J REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIltECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2UU9 CONSENT 6A 1 MELISSA POEHLMAN, CITY PLANNER NAME, TITLE SlGNATUR~ • ~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider a first reading of changes to the General Building and Performance Standards section of the Zoning Code. Proposed changes are related to exterior lighting requirements and telecommunication tower and antenna standards. . I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a first reading of the attached ordinance amending Richfield City Code Section 544 related to exterior lighting and telecommunication tower and antenna standards. II. BACKGROUND The City Council approved a revised and updated Zoning Code on November 13, 2007. Prior to this update, the zoning ordinances had not been thoroughly reviewed and/or updated since 1999. In an effort to avoid another multi-year project to update the Code, staff intends to periodically review each section and propose amendments as needs are identified. Over the course of the last year, staff has identified two subsections of the General Building and Performance Standards section of the Code that are in need of • revision. Specifically the subsections related to exterior lighting and telecommunication towers have proved difficult to understand and implement. The proposed amendments seek to simplify and clarify regulations, as opposed to making major policy changes. 011309 -Ord. Amend -lighting & telecom. towers Subsection 544.09 -Exterior liahtinq • In 2007 lighting standards for commercial and multi-family residential projects were significantly enhanced from-the previous 1999 Code. Many of the standards adopted came directly from the Mixed-Use Districts and were originally prepared as a part of the I-494 Corridor Study. As staff attempted to enforce these regulations, a number of difficulties became apparent. For instance, the measurement procedures prescribed were not standard and posed problems for contractors submitting illumination plans. Ambiguous definitions also proved to be a problem. Following discussions with the consultant who had initially proposed these regulations, Public Safety and Building Inspections staff, the attached amendments were drafted. The changes seek to balance public safety and aesthetics, clarify language and standardize procedures for measurement. Staff also reviewed the code requirements of Bloomington and Golden Valley as a comparison. Subsection 544.25 -Telecommunication towers and antennas The goal of the 2007 revisions to the telecommunication tower regulations was to update antiquated language and to compile all relevant information into a single area of the Code. While these goals were achieved, staff has found that the organization of this subsection is difficult to navigate. Specifically, tower and antenna standards are not clearly differentiated, making it difficult to interpret which regulations apply in a specific case. Although they look extensive, proposed changes are almost entirely related to these organizational issues and simply move . text from one area of the subsection to another. The only proposed substantive change is to add a "drop zone" regulation that will require towers to maintain a minimum distance from any residential structure equal to twice the height of the tower itself. As in the case of exterior lighting standards, the codes of surrounding communities were used as a comparison. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The rules and regulations of a city's zoning code are meant to protect health, safety and welfare, but zoning codes also provide the tools with which a City moves closer to its vision for the future, as presented by the Comprehensive Plan. • Staff continually works to identify areas of the Code that are in need of updating or prove difficult to interpret. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The proposed revisions are intended to clarify language and reorganize sections into a format that is accessible to all interested parties. • On November 28, 2008 the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the attached ordinance amendments (8-0). C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL ~ • NOTIFICATION: A public hearing was conducted before the Planning Commission on November 24, 2008.. Notification of the hearing was provided in accordance with City and State requirements. • If approved, a second reading will be held on January 27, 2009. • If a second reading is approved, the amendments will take effect 30 days following publication in the Sun Current Newspaper. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Recommend approval of the proposed amendments with additional changes. • Recommend denial of the proposed amendments. V. ATTACHMENTS • Ordinance • VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • ~A-I BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE SUBSECTIONS 544.09 AND 544.25 RELATED TO EXTERIOR LIGHTING AND TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND ANTENNAS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Subsection 544.09, subdivision 2 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 2. Mitigative measures shall be employed to limit glare and spill light to protect neighboring parcels and to maintain traffic and pedestrian safety on public streets and sidewalks. Illumination cast from lighting of the subject parcel shall not exceed one (11 footcandle as measured from the centerline of a public street or residential propertv line. These-Mitigative measures shall include lenses, shields, louvers, prismatic control devices and limitations on the height and type of fixtures. Sec. 2 Subsection 544.09, subdivision 8 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 8. Lighting fixtures mounted directly on structures shall be permitted when utilized to enhance specific architectural elements or to help establish scale or provide visual interest, except as otherwise noted in Subdivisions 9 and 10. Sec. 3 Subsection 544.09, subdivision 9 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. 9. "Wall paks" shall be permitted only in loading and service areas and shall be down-lit..anc~ chi ~tl frnm "~• Sec. 4 Subsection 544.09, subdivision 12 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: Subd. '12. Tha f :itv may rani lira at tha ~ar'c ~RAnca ci ~imiccinn of ,Qmatrir li Pubin~q•,~anci ira thgl,iata anri p,priata ~~ara h citjCn Tha ills ~mina,{j~in chq~j~l ham a c nc*• P~ Ri igr~ntran~c~c _ ~1 ~i~~jkc 7 _ ~~ Rikyc 1 aprilaq P c ~, _ ~1 4tai~~ic ~ f,~f~,int_ranrtlr~c ~~ I_~rJcrracccc ~, _ r~ \/~j~q~ araac _ jl Per Into 1 _ }1 Rr~ic 1 _ *\/ali_,,,, iA~i~~An ~c in mi curl hnri~r~q~f,~pip,~ ranrllac which ALP maac~ irc,,,~2t thA a~iaran~? nnint of ills imin aan thA,.,,__hri?htact J~act ar,,~ac d'_~' ~up tha ~}['D1Jt]~ Sara (Ca• IF4 I i~Jitinn H~q~ppk - d~ Frlitinn~, 011309 -Ord. Amend -lighting & telecom. towers ~A~a If installed, exterior lighting shall meet the functional needs of the use, without adversely affecting adjacent properties, neighborhoods or public uses, as determined by the Citv. Specific requirements are listed below: however, the Citv reserves the right to adjust these requirements based on concerns rec~ardina safety. security and/or impacts on surrounding properties. Illumination measurements shall be taken by positioning the meter horizontally at around level. Open-air parkins lots (including the roof level of multi-level parking structures): Minimum - 0.2 fc Maximum - 4.0 fc Minimum uniformity ratio - 20:1 Primary building entrances /exits: Multi-family residential Minimum - 5.0 fc within 5 feet of the entrance /exit Commercial /Industrial Minimum - 10.0 fc within 5 feet of the entrance / .exit Sec. 5 Subsection 544.25 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 544.25. Telecommunication Towers and antennas. Subdivision 1. In order to accommodate the communication needs of residents and businesses while protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community, the Council finds that these regulations are necessary in order to: a) Facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunication services to the residents and businesses of the City; b) Minimize adverse. visual effects of towers through careful design and sitting standards; c) Avoid potential damage to adjacent properties from tower failure through structural standards and setback requirements; and d) Maximize the use of existing and approved towers and buildings to accommodate new wireless telecommunication antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community. Subd. 2. Permits. a}~It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to erect, construct in place, place or re-erect, replace, or repair any tower without first making application to the Department of Community Development and securing athe required zoning and building permits #hexefoxe~c hcrcinaftc-~i ~pyj~p~{. h) Tha 2nt chill rr~~r~ timc jpn c~ ~~ant inf,Qrma ' n i~pn ~C3L~ majntapf tha antenna and tn~niar ~nrill not rraatP a cafaty ha~arri nr riamane to tha nrnnarFv of nthar narcr~p~,c_ r) Subd. 3. Exemptions. Permits are not required for: a) Adjustment or replacement of the elements of an antenna array affixed to a tower or antenna, provided that replacement does not reduce the safety factor. b) Antennae and/or towers erected temporarily for test purposes; for emergency communication, or for broadcast remote pick-up operations. ~A~3 Temporary antennae shall be removed within 72 hours following installation. Subd. 4. Submittal Requirements. The applicant shall provide at the time of application sufficient information to indicate that construction, installation, and maintenance of the antenna and tower will not create a safety hazard or damage to the .property of other persons. In addition to the information required elsewhere in this Code, development applications for towers shall include the following supplemental information: a) A report from a qualified and licensed professional engineer which: i. Describes the tower height and design including a cross section and elevation; ii. Documents the height above grade for all potential mounting positions for co- located antennas and the minimum separation distances between antennas;, iii. Describes the tower's capacity. including the number and type of antennas that it can accommodate: iv. Documents what steps the applicant will take to avoid interference with established public safety telecommunications: v. Includes an engineer's stamp and registration number; and, vi. Includes other information necessary to evaluate the request. b) For all commercial wireless telecommunication service towers, a letter of intent committing the tower owner and his or her successors to allow the shared use of the tower if an additional user agrees in writing to meet reasonable terms and conditions for shared use. c) Before the issuance of a building permit, the following supplemental information shall be submitted: i. Proof that the proposed tower complies with regulations administered by Federal Aviation Administration; and, ii. A report from a qualified and licensed professional engineer which demonstrates the tower's compliance with the aforementioned structural and. electrical standards. dl All abandoned or unused towers and associated facilities shall be removed, within 12 months of the cessation of operations at the site unless the Director approves a time extension. In the event that a tower is not removed within 12, months of the cessation of operations at a site, the tower and associated facilities may be removed by the Citv and the costs of removal assessed- against the property. - Subd. 35. Towers in Residential Zoning Districts. Towers shall be allowed- only in the following residentially zoned areas: a) Towers supporting amateur radio antennas and conforming to all applicable provisions of this Code shall be allowed only in the rear yard of residentially zoned parcels. b) Towers supporting commercial antennas and conforming to all applicable provisions of this Code shall be allowed only in the following. residentially zoned locations: i. Church sites, when camouflaged as steeples or bell towers; ii. Park sites, when compatible with the nature of the park; and, ] J i ` ~ iii. Government, school, utility, and institutional sites, not including the public right-of-way. cnn~c in +hc P~ ~r Ri~h+_nf_\/VaT \A/iralacc +alarnmmi in' ' and antannac m~„rn_Iq~a+a ~yj~}Lavic{~q,g,p~lac r~~~re i r 4+~ rinht_nf-wav within ~i ~nnin~lic+ri~„ Subd. 56. Co-Location Requirements. All commercial wireless telecommunication towers erected, constructed, or located within the City shall comply with the following requirements: a) A proposal for a new commercial wireless telecommunication service tower shall not be approved unless the City Council finds that the telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or building within a one mile search radius (one half mile search radius for towers under 120 feet in height, one quarter mile search radius for towers under 80 feet in height) of the proposed tower due to one or more of the following reasons: i. The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the existing or approved tower or building, as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer, and the existing or approved tower cannot be reinforced, modified, or replaced to accommodate planned or equivalent equipment at a reasonable cost. ii. The planned equipment would cause interference materially impacting the usability of other existing or planned equipment at the tower or building as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost. iii. Existing or approved towers and buildings within the search radius cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function reasonably as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer. iv. Other unforeseen reasons that make it infeasible to locate the planned telecommunications equipment upon an existing or approved tower or building. b) Any proposed commercial wireless telecommunication service tower shall be designed, structurally, electrically, and in all respects, to accommodate both the applicant's antennas and comparable antennas for at least 2 additional users if the tower is over 100 feet in height or for at least 1 additional user if the tower is over 60 feet in height. Towers must be designed to allow for future .rearrangement of antennas upon the tower and to accept antennas mounted at varying heights. Subd. fi7. Tower and antenna Design Requirements. Proposed or modified towers and attached antennas shall meet the following design requirements. a) Towers and antennas shall be designed to blend into the surrounding . environment through the use of color and camouflaging architectural treatment, except in instances where the color is dictated by federal or state authorities such as the Federal Aviation Administration. b) Commercial wireless telecommunication service towers shall be of a monopole design unless the City Council determines that an alternative design would S better blend into the surrounding environment. Subd. Z8. Tower Setbacks. Towers shall conform to each of the following minimum setback requirements: ~~-s a) Towers shall meet the setbacks of the underlying zoning district with the exception of industrial zoning districts, where towers may encroach into the rear setback area, provided that the rear property line abuts another industrially zoned property and the tower does not encroach upon any easements. b) Towers shall maintain a minimum distance from the nearest residential structure eaual to twice the heiaht of the tower. - h~Towers shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street, with the following exceptions: i. In industrial zoning districts, towers may be placed within a side yard abutting an internal industrial street. ii. On sites abutted by public streets on all sides, towers may be placed within a side yard abutting a local street. ed~A tower's setback may be reduced or its location in relation to a public street varied, at the sole discretion of the City Council., to allow the integration of a tower into an existing or proposed structure such as a church steeple, light standard, power line support device, or similar structure. , Subd. $9. Tower Height. The heiaht of a telecommunication tower and antenna shall be measured as the distance from around level to the highest point on the tower.. including the antenna. a) In all residential property, the maximum height of any tower inr_li irlinn all Pr att~rhman+~ shall be 30 feet. b) In all residential zoning districts other than designated residential property, the maximum height of any tower, in~i~ ~dinry an rhmante shall not exceed one foot for each four feet the tower is setback from designated residential property up to a maximum height of 75 feet. c) In all non-residential zoning districts, the maximum height of any tower~g ~an+ann rhmantc shall not exceed one foot for each two feet the tower is setback from designated residential property up to a maximum height of 75 feet in non-industrial zoning districts and 100 feet in industrial zoning districts. d) In accordance with the Federal Communications Commission's preemptive ruling PRB1, towers and antennas erected for the primary purpose of supporting amateur radio communications may exceed the height restrictions of (3), above, but shall not exceed 65 feet in height. e) In addition to the height limitations noted above, no tower shall be constructed or changed so as to project above any Airspace SurFace as shown on MSP Zoning Map Airspace Zones of the MSP Zoning Ordinance. Subd. 510. Tower Lighting. Towers shall not be illuminated by artificial means and shall not display strobe lights unless such lighting is specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other federal or state authority for a particular tower. -When , incorporated into the approved design of the tower, light fixtures. used to illuminate ball • fields, parking lots, or similar areas may be attached to the tower. Subd. 1II1. Signs and Advertising. The use of any portion of a tower for signs other than warning or equipment information signs is prohibited. ~~~v Subd. 112. Associated Equipment. Ground equipment associated with a tower or wireless telecommunications facility shall be screened by vegetative or other screening compatible with the surrounding environment if deemed necessary by the Director or designee. When associated ground equipment is housed in a building or structure, that building or structure shall be architecturally designed to blend in with the surrounding. environment and shall meet the minimum setback requirements of.the underlying zoning district. Ground equipment associated with a wireless telecommunications facility may. be located on residentially used property only within a utility easement adjacent to the public right-of-way, except in the multi-family zoning districts where ground equipment associated with a wireless telecommunications facility may also be located within. a code complying building or structure after receiving the approvals required by this Code. Subd. 123. Antennas Mounted on Roofs, Walls, and Existing Towers. The placement of wireless telecommunication. antennas on roofs, walls, and existing towers may be approved by the Director, provided the antennas meet the requirements of this Code,. after submittal of 1) a site and building plan and 2) a report prepared by a qualified and licensed professional engineer indicating the existing structure or tower's suitability to accept the antenna, and the proposed method of affixing the antenna to the structure. Complete details of all fixtures and couplings, and the precise point of attachment shall be indicated. Antennas shall be mounted on the facade of the building or penthouse structure unless the Director or designee determines that another antenna mounting location decreases the visual impact of the antennas. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from view. S~~hr~l 1R jpq~~Cllhmj~al Rar~lli~antc In ~{djfjnn tn~a infpjp,p~p„q~~{ . ~,p~a in Chic C' ant ~nnc ~pr tn~"~crc ch~Lla th~{pJJp~ipg ~p~amantal infprmatinn• al-~--A-- r~ rf from a ~nri lirancar„~-~accir,1g21 an i r~~jhcc t~yar hair~ht anr-1 rlacin~, inrlurlinn a r_rncc c~pp~d. eJea~ca#iOn.! 1i r~antc tha hai Pub a nl Intinrf~citinnc fir rr~ Jp,G2tari ~annac ~~a minjml Im c~2rati~Cac hp„fipiaan antann~ !ii I~g~~ac tha tn~n~ar'c r a nl lm~•tvn~a of antannaq that it ran ~,~~mmgt{ata- j~,i rlnantc mat cta,~c thant ~y~ll takes to avniri intarfaranra ~ p~~hlicharl ~ilir• c ~i Inr_I~ mac an anninaar'c c n nl Irq,bar• anrt aii InrJj,l~iac ~thar inf~atinn n~accanr~r~ tho ror'~~ r) Fnr marp~acc t 'nn canij~p•~p,[arc, ~f in+..qt r•nmmittinn tha tnSniar n~nmar anr~ hie nr har cl ~acenrc + 1 Ica the tn~^iar if an a ac in ~niriting to moat r~gp,q,a}~a tarmc and lDI''c fir chi ~p„fnra +ha iccl •t tha antal infnrmatinrt chall ~,a C11~ i Prnnf that tha nrnnncari trnniar ~mm~liac ~nii+h r m i n ictr~{jpp~q,~, • ii A ra~nnrt from ~~f j#j~~rl liranca~nfaccin~l anninaar ~~ihirl•~ p„nctr~pc tha trlyiar'c ~p,q~~jianr~piith tha ~iramantinpeCl ctr~~,lral apt{ ,gj,ertrir~,2 rri c tl) arc ~~i ace ' 'ac cl~all yj~ 17 m~nthc nc at tha citp~,lnlacc the f~irartnr annrnuac ~ ~~~~ ~r~ncipn In the PVant r~r ie not re-mnyP~{,n '17 min+hc of th~j,p•Q ~jpne at a cjfa tha tgri ace ' 'ac rl her tha f~ity and ~a rnctc of ramn~ial accr~ccarj~g,ainct thg~p~c-+~r + Subd. 14. Antenna Design and Mounts. Applicants shall use antenna designs and mounts that minimize visual impact. Subd. 15. Co-location in the Public Right-of-Wav. Wireless telecommunication facilities and antennas may co-locate with existing poles or towers in the Citv. Countv, or State right-of-wav within anv zoning district. Subd. 1~6. Maintenance and Inspections. Tower and antenna finish and paint shall be maintained in good condition, free from rust, graffiti, peeling paint, or other blemish. a) All towers may be inspected at least once each year by an official of the Building and Inspection Division to determine compliance with original construction standards. Deviation from original construction for which a permit is obtained constitutes a violation of this Section. b) Notice of violations will be sent by registered mail to the owner and he will have 30 days from the date the notification is issued to make repairs. The owner will notify the Building and Inspection Division that the repairs have been made, and as soon as possible thereafter, another inspection will be made and the owner notified of the results. ,~tl 1 ~p,ntanna,~acinnpl,mtc 2n+c chall ~ ~er~ agtann~{,aci~p~pd• gapLinte that minimi~l im~~ Subd. 157. Variances. The following standards apply to variance requests for towers, antennas, or wireless telecommunication facilities. a) The City Council shall consider the following issues in addition to the variance findings required in Section 547.11 of this Code. i. The viability of Code complying alternative locations for the proposed tower, antenna, or wireless telecommunication facility. ii. The impacts of the tower, antenna, or wireless telecommunication facility at the proposed site relative to the impacts of the tower, antenna, or wireless telecommunication facility at a Code complying alternative location. iii. The extent to which there is a significant gap in coverage surrounding the proposed tower, antenna, or wireless telecommunication facility or other evidence of inadequate service due to antenna location. iv. The extent to which the proposed tower, antenna, or wireless telecommunication facility is the least intrusive, lowest impact design available. v. The extent to which the height of the proposed tower, antenna, or wireless ,telecommunication facility could be reduced and still provides adequate coverage. vi. The extent to which the size of the proposed accessory equipment could be reduced. vii. The feasibility of placing the proposed accessory equipment underground. . b) The applicant shall pay the reasonable cost of the City retaining a qualified, independent radio frequency engineer to provide a professional opinion to the City Council if the Director or designee determines that an independent radio frequency engineer is needed to assist in consideration of these regulations. (~~~8 Sec. 6 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the Richfield • City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 27th day of January 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # ~J~ REPORT # 9 • J STAr~r~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: 777ZE *~ -- - - ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: • Consideration of a resolution regarding Council Member attendance at Council meetings. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution regarding attendance by Council Members at Council meetings for 2009. II. BACKGROUND. ~ Subsection 105.15 of the Richfield City Code establishes an attendance policy for Council Members. The policy requires attendance to be taken at every regular and special meeting of the City Council and provides for the imposition of a monetary penalty for unexcused absence from a Council meeting. The policy may be annually invoked by resolution of the City Council III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. ~OLICY ~ • The Richfield City Code establishes attendance rules, which may be invoked for any calendar year by Council resolution. • IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) ~ • Defer action on this item to another Council meeting. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. • City Code Subsection 205.15 VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. YL KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COORDINATOR 0113attendance ~~-l RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING ATTENDANCE BY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT COUNCIL MEETINGS • WHEREAS, the attendance of Council Members at meetings is one of the most important duties imposed by law on members; and WHEREAS, member presence to participate in hearings, deliberations and decisions of the Council is essential to the proper discharge of the member's official duties; and WHEREAS, recognizing that it is .not always possible for a member to be present at all meetings and that by reason of business demands, state of health, personal problems, vacations and other matters, occasional absences are excusable; and WHEREAS, Subsection 205.15 of the Richfield City Code establishes rules for attendance at City Council meetings that may be invoked by resolution of the Council. N.OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the following rules apply to absences of Council Members from meetings during calendar year 2005: This resolution applies to all regular meetings of the Council, as defined in Subsection 205.01 of the Richfield City Code. This resolution also applies to duly called special business meetings of the Council. The resolution does not apply to special informational or special ceremonial meetings. Special Council meetings are those called pursuant to Subsection 205.03 of the Richfield City Code. For purposes of this resolution, special meetings are further categorized as: a) Special business meetings. Special business meetings include: Special meetings called to conduct official business of the City where the Council • considers action requiring a vote of the City Council; special work study meetings; and special meetings called for the purpose of conducting a public hearing. b) Special informational meetings. Special informational meetings are those called for the City Council to receive information or to participate in discussion but where no official action of the City Council is taken, except that the term does not include special work study meetings or meetings called for the purpose of conducting a public hearing. c) Special ceremonial meetings. Special ceremonial meetings are those called for ceremonial activities but where no official action of the City Council is taken, including ribbon cuttings, community celebrations and similar activities. 2. Any member of the Council desiring to be excused shall insofar as possible, give advance notice to the City Manager stating i) the meeting at which the member will be absent; ii) the member's reason for being absent; and iii) the member's location .during the meeting. 3. At the beginning of each regular or special business meeting, the Clerk shall call the roll. If a member is absent, the City Manager shall report any communication from the absent Council Member regarding the reason for absence. The Mayor shall request the Council Members to determine whether the absence is excusable or inexcusable. . 4. For each unexcused absence from a regular or special business meeting, the absent member shall be penalized by a fine of $25 and the Mayor, if absent, shall be penalized by a fine of $50. The fine shall be automatically deducted from the next Council Member payment unless otherwise directed by a majority of the City Council Members present. 10~~ 5. This resolution remains in effect until December 31, 2009 unless revoked prior to that date by resolution of the City Council. This resolution supersedes Resolution No. 10050. • Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy- Gibbs, City Clerk • • Richfield City Code ~ ~ . ?J 205.15 (Rev. 2000) 205.15. Attendance at council meetings. Attendance of council members at meetings is one of the most important duties imposed by law on members. Member presence to participate in the hearings, delib- erations and decisions of the council is essential to the proper discharge of the member's official duties. Recognizing that it is not always possible for a member to be present at all meetings, and that by reason of business demands, state of health, personal problems, vacations and other matters occasional absences are .excusable, the following rules apply to absences of council members from meetings when :invoked by resolution of the council: (a) such rules shall remain in effect until the end of the calendar year during which the resolution is passed unless revoked prior to that time by resolution of the council; (b) unless excused by a majority of the city council, a member of the council may not be absent from any regular meeting or from such special meetings as the council may specify in the resolution; (c) for each unexcused absence from a regular or special meeting of the council each council member may be penalized by a fine of not to exceed $75, and the mayor may be penalized by a fine of an amount not to exceed $100, but the resolution may specify a lesser penalty for absence from a special meeting .than a regular meeting; (d) any member of the council desiring to be excused shall insofar as possible give advance notice to the manager, stating (i) the meeting at which the member will be absent, (ii) the member's • reason for being absent and, (iii) the member's location during the meeting. (Amended, Bill No. 2000-3) • • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6C REPORT # 3 J JANUARY 13, 2009 • REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING G CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COORDINATOR. TIT ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a designation of an Acting City Manager for 2009. •~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Direct the City Manager to designate an available Department Director or the Assistant to the City Manager as Acting City Manager for 2009 in the event the City Manager is absent from the City. II. BACKGROUND It is necessary to designate a person to serve as the Acting City Manager for those times when the City Manager is absent from the City. In 2008, the City Manager designated various Department Directors or the Assistant to the City Manager as Acting City Manager. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • • Past practice has been for the City Council to designate an Acting City Manager for times when the City Manager is absent from the City. • In 2008, the City Manager designated various Department Directors or the Assistant to the City Manager as Acting City Manager. 0113actingcitymanager • B. CRITICAL ISSUES , • It is necessary to designate a person to serve as the Acting City Manager to ensure continuation of City operations during an absence of the Manager. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Defer this designation to another Council meeting V. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6D REPORT # L~ J REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVI REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAr~r~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 NANCY GIBBS, CITY CLERK ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution designating an official newspaper for 2009. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the resolution designating the Richfield Sun- Current as the official newspaper for the City of Richfield for 2009. ,. II. BACKGROUND The Richfield Sun-Current, published by Minnesota Sun Publications, has been the City's official newspaper for many years. Attached is a copy of a letter from Minnesota Sun Publications requesting that they be designated the official newspaper for the City of Richfield for 2009. The 2009 advertising rate structure for legal notices is as follows: 1 Column width $14.30 per inch for first insertion $ 7.15 per subsequent inch • There are 11 lines per inch. The 2008 rate was the same as the rate proposed for 2009. For 2009 the Minneapolis Star Tribune Newspaper could be considered as the official newspaper. Attached is a fax of the 2009 advertising rate structure for legal 0113newspaper notices in the Sunday and weekday, metro and .statewide issues. ~ The rate is $3.40 • per line. Their 2009 rate has decreased from the 2008 rate of $4.75 per line. Based on the 2009 rates for 11 lines per inch, the total would be $37.40 per inch in the Star Tribune compared to $14.30 per inch in the Sun-Current. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Charter of the City of Richfield requires in Section 13.01 thereof that the City Council annually designate an official newspaper for the City. • The Sun-Current has expressed an interest in continuing to serve as the official newspaper of the City. • The Sun-Current has served well as the official paper for many years. • The Sun-Current is delivered to nearly all residences in the City. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The designation must be made at the first meeting of the new year. C. FINANCIAL • The cost of the official publication is reasonable. • D. LEGAL • A newspaper must be designated each year by the City for publication of all official and legal City business. IV. ALirxNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Not make a designation and request the City Clerk's office to check into using another publication. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • .Letter from Minnesota Sun Publications • Fax from Star Tribune VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~' RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AN OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 2009 WHEREAS, the Charter of the City of Richfield requires in Section 13.01 thereof that the City Council annually designate an official newspaper for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Richfield Sun-Current is designated the official legal newspaper for the City of Richfield for 2009 for all publications -required to be published therein. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk r-~.x....t,~ w~~~ ~ ~ Sun Patriot ~titttnater * ~~~ ~e1r°a Beacon PRESSQ.,~.EVI/S .: " ,.•r"-~ "~ .• ~ Newspapers ~ ~~ e~11~ ~X~ wwcvmnsun:com 116 East River 408 E. Main St. 33 Second St. N.E. 10917 Valley View Road 8 Elm Street South 1931 Curve Crest Blvd. Mnnt`irelln MN 553Fv.'Z Tdelr~~o A~~ C6352. oSSe^v, ~vi.*~ 55369 .~..de ; .Ura'u^: ~.*.~~ ~~344 :r aCvTa"' wRwi cc~o^~ o..:n._, w r ccnon ,a, ivuv JJJCI / .~uuwatei, i~u'~ //vot. November 19, 2008 City of Richfield City Council 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423-2599 Dear City- Council Members: The Richfield Sun-Current would like to be considered for designation as the legal newspaper for the City of Richfield for the upcoming year. All published legal notices are posted on our website (www.mnsun.com) at no additional charge. This is an enhancement to the local news coverage already available on the Internet and will broaden the readership of your legal notices. One of the main benefits of publishing your legal notices with the Sun-Current is our home delivery. Sun Newspapers has become the primary source of community news in the suburbs. Your notices in ~ur paper have the best chance of being seen and read. We would like to continue working with you, therefore, we will not be making a rate change for the coming year. The rate- structure for legals effective the first of the year will be: 1 column width: $14.30 per inch for first insertion $7.15 per inch for subsequent insertions Our columns are 14 picas wide There are 11 lines per inch Two notarized affidavits on each of your publications will be provided with no additional charge. The deadline for regular length notices is 2:00 p.m. the Thursday prior to publication. E-mailing the legal notices is an efficient and accurate way of getting the notices to us. The e-mail address for the Iegals department is sunleaals@acnoagers.com. If you require more information to make your deci- sion, please contact me or Mary Ann Carlson, our Legals Representative, at 952-392-6829. Thank you for considering the Sun-Current as the official newspaper for the City of Richfield for the upcoming year. We appreciate the opportunity to serve the needs of your community. Sincerely, Bob Cole Vice President and Group Publisher In the Community • With the Community • For the Community ~jool STAR TRIBUNE CLS. ADV. 12/3012008 11:56 FAQ 612 673 4884 - ~D~3 - - • - . j r' - '~ . i~Ax NU1Nf3Eli: {sit} 67S-4s84 _ M f N N E A P O L t S S T. P A u ~ - pi{QQE N!-MBERS: (612j 673-7000 425 Port?and Avenue i-8a0-927-9233 PAinneapoils, Minnesota 55488-0002 EEpEtiltL EKPIiESS1f~IR80Rtti: MAIL -USE Zip Code 55415 ~~ ~~~ {~ - TE ~ s. DA PLEASE .DELIVER T _ DELIVERY FRDM; t~tUMBER DF PACES tNCLUDINC COVER SMEET: ~ _vv r ~~~ i ~..~. U~ -. - _ . ~~ ~~ ~ r. - r - • J AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6E ,REPORT # S 5 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING J~vUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIIZECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE ~~~~.~~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: !Consideration of resolutions designating official depositories for the City of Richfield for 2009, ~, including the approval of collateral. ,. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the resolutions designating official depositories, with the understanding that the City could not invest in any of the depositories beyond the level of insurance coverage or the pledged collateral. II. BACKGROUND N/A III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION N/A A. POLICY • In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 118A.01 - 118A.06, the City of Richfield must designate financial institutions annually. The institutions must pledge the collateral over and above the amount of federal insurance, as public depositories. • U.S. Bank acts as the banking institution in the City's banking arrangement with the 4M Fund. Monies received, checks written by the City, flow through U.S. Bank, however, at the end of each 0113deposits business day,- any proceeds remaining in City U.S. Bank accounts are swept to the 4M Fund to be invested. Therefore, at the end of the business day the City accounts are zero, which means the collateral requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 118A.03 are not required. Accordingly, U.S. Bank has met all other statutory requirements and should be considered as a depository for the City's Deputy Registrar, payroll and vendor accounts and all savings deposits. • The City must also designate annually, certain savings and loan associations, banks, and credit unions as official depositories for deposit and investment of certain City funds. With approval of these official depositories, the City will be able to deposit and invest funds in these institutions, .not exceeding the federal insurance of $250,000. • Finally, a designation must be made for certain financial institutions as depositories for the investment of City funds for 2009. These institutions, such as investment brokerage firms, offer government securities in the manner required by law. These financial institutions include U.S. Bank, RBC Dain Rauscher, Wells Fargo Institutional Brokerage & Sales, Morgan Keegan, Piper JafFray & Co., Northland Securities and the 4M Fund. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A • C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. .LEGAL • The City is required by Minnesota Statute 118A.01 - 118A.06, to designate as a depository of funds, insured banks or thrift institutions. Any collateral so deposited is accompanied by an assignment pledged to the City in the amount specified in the attached resolutions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALI~KNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The City Council could solicit other financial institutions for official depositories, but past relationships with the depositories recommended have proven satisfactory for the City. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution designating US Bank a depository of funds of the City of Richfield for the year 2009. • Resolution designating certain savings and loan associations, banks, and credit unions as depositories for the investment of City funds in 2009. • Resolution designating certain financial institutions as depositories for the investment of City of Richfield funds in 2009. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None ~I I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING U.S. BANK A DEPOSITORY OF FUNDS OF.THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR THE YEAR 2009 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield. as follows: That, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 118A.01- 118A.06, U.S. Bank be, and hereby is designated a depository of the funds of the City of Richfield, subject to modification and revocation at any time by said City, and subject to the following terms and conditions: .The said depository shall not be required to give bonds or other securities for such deposits provided that the total sum thereof shall not at any time exceed in any depository the sums for which its deposits are insured under the Acts of Congress of the United States relating to insurance of bank deposits; but that in case such deposits in any such depository shall at any time exceed such insured sum, said depository shall immediately furnish bonds or other security for such excess according to law, approved, by the City Council of said City. That said depository shall pay on demand all deposits therein; and shall pay all time deposits, at or after the end of the period for which the same shall be deposited, on demand. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be maintained a general account in which shall be deposited all monies from the water, sewer, storm sewer, liquor, swimming pool/ice arena, deputy register fees, City permits and other deposits not otherwise specifically provided. for. The following officers or their facsimile signatures shall sign checks on this account; STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all funds remaining in the account at the end of each business day will be transferred from U.S. Bank to the 4M Fund where funds deposited are invested and insured. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. ATTEST: Debbie Goettel, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk W ~'~ RESOLUTION. NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN SAVING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS, BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS AS DEPOSITORIES FOR THE DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT OF CITY fUNDS IN 2009 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of City of Richfield, Minnesota WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 118A.01 - 118A.06, municipal funds may be deposited in any Savings and- Loan Association, Bank or Credit Union which has its deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), and WHEREAS, the amount of said deposits may not exceed the FDIC/NCUA insurance covering such deposits which- insurance amount is presently $250,000, and WHEREAS, the deposit of City funds in Savings and Loan Associations and Banks would provide greater flexibility in the City's investment program and maximize interest income thereon, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interest of the proper management of City funds that various banks be designated as additional depositories for City funds for 2009. 2. It is further found and determined that the purpose of such depository designation is to facilitate the proper and advantageous deposit and investment of City funds and that such designation is not exclusive nor does it preclude the deposit of any City funds in other officially designated depositories of the City. 3. The Treasurer and Finance Manager are hereby authorized to deposit City funds in various depositories up to the amount of $250,000, or such other amount as may be subsequently permitted by law, such deposits to be in the form of demand accounts, payable to the City of Richfield on the signatures of the City Treasurer or Finance Manager. Such deposits may be made and withdrawn from time to time by the Treasurer or Finance Manager as his best judgment and the interests of the City dictates. 4. The investment of funds and the reporting thereof pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted in accordance with established policies of the City regarding the investment of City funds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. • ATTEST: Debbie Goettel, Mayor Nancy Gibbs,. City Clerk ~~-3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AS DEPOSITORIES FOR THE INVESTMENT OF CITY OF RICHFIELD FUNDS IN 2009 WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has money which is available for investment, and WHEREAS, different financial institutions offer different rates of return on investments, and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield shall purchase U. S. Treasury Bills, U. S. Treasury Notes and other such government. securities in the manner required by law from the institution offering the highest rate to the City of Richfield providing greater flexibility in the investment program and maximize interest income thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Richfield, Minnesota, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 118A.01 - 118A.06, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interest of the proper management of City of Richfield funds that certain financial institutions be designated as additional depositories for City of Richfield funds for 2009. • 2. The following financial institutions designated as depositories for the City of Richfield funds: RBC Dain Rauscher, Inc. Piper Jaffray & Co. Wells Fargo Institutional Brokerage & Sales Morgan Keegan 4M Fund Northland Securities, Inc. 3. The Treasurer and Finance Manager are hereby authorized to deposit the City of Richfield funds in any or all of the depositories herein designated. Such deposits may be made and withdrawn from time to time by the Treasurer or Finance Manager's judgment and as the interest of the City of Richfield .dictates. 4. The investment of funds and the reporting thereof pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted in accordance with established policies regarding the investment of these funds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. • Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6F REPORT # • ~~ STAr'r' REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING J~vUARY 13, 2009 • • REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRiS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NAME, TITLE ~~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution authorizing the use of a credit card by City employees otherwise ,. authorized to make purchases on behalf of the City. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1 By Motion: Adopt the resolution authorizing the use of a City credit card by City employees-otherwise authorized to make purchases on behalf of the City. II. BACKGROUND • Minnesota Statutes Section 471.382, require the City of Richfield to authorize the use of credit cards by any City employee otherwise authorized to make a purchase on behalf of the City. • In today's business environment, most retail businesses, will no longer allow the City to purchase on account and will only accept a City check or a City credit card. • Consequently, the use of a City credit card provides efficiency and flexibility for employees to purchase goods and services on behalf of the City. • The City currently uses the following credit cards: • Five VISA credit cards issued through the Richfield Bloomington Credit Union in the name of the City. The cardholders are the following: • City Manager • Public Safety Director - • Public Works Director • Community Development Director • Recreation Services Director 0113authorize credit card use • Four British Petroleum (BP) credit cards issued to the City of Richfield Department of Public Safety. The cardholders are the Deputy • Director/Deputy Chief and the three Police Lieutenants. • Three Roundy's credit cards issued to the City of Richfield Recreation Services Department. The Recreation Administration, Wood Lake Nature Center and the Ice Arena use the cards. The cards when not in use are maintained in a locked safe. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY J • In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 471.382, the City of Richfield must authorize the use of credit cards by any City employee otherwise authorized to make a purchase on behalf of the City. • Further, if a City employee makes or directs a purchase by credit card that is not approved by the City Council, the employee could be personally liable for the amount of the purchase. • A purchase by credit card must .otherwise comply with all statutes, rules, and City policies applicable to City purchases. • Finally, the City's auditors recommend that the City authorize the use of credit cards by City employees on an annual basis. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A • C. FINANCIAL • The holders of City credit cards are responsible for reviewing and approving all purchases entered into with the credit card. D. LEGAL The City is required by Minnesota Statute 471.382, to authorize the use of credit cards by City employees otherwise authorized to make purchases on behalf of the City. E. ENVIIZONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ l • The City Council could decide to not authorize the use of credit cards by City employees. However, most retail businesses in today's environment will ~no longer allow the City to purchase on account and will only accept a City check or a City credit card. The use of City credit cards by employees provides efficiency and- flexibility for employees to purchase goods and services on behalf of the_ city. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None ~~- I RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE USE OF CREDIT CARDS BY CITY EMPLOYEES OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED TO -MAKE PURCHASES ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD FOR THE YEAR 2009 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: That, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.382; the City Council of the City of Richfield may authorize the use of a credit card by City employees otherwise authorized to make a purchase on behalf of the City. The authorization is subject to modification and revocation at any time by said City Council, of the City of Richfield, and subject to the following terms and conditions: If a City employee makes or directs a purchase by credit card that is not approved by the City Council, the employee can be personally liable for the amount of purchase. The purchases by credit card must comply with all statutes, rules and City of Richfield policies applicable to City purchases. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that designated City staff is hereby authorized to use the following City credit cards to make purchases on behalf of the City of Richfield: • Five VISA credit cards issued through the Richfield Bloomington Credit Union in the name of the City. The cardholders are the following: • • City Manager • Public Safety Director • Public Works Director • Community Development Director • Recreation Services Director • Four British Petroleum (BP) credit cards issued to the City of Richfield Department of Public Safety. The cardholders are the following: • Deputy Director/Deputy Chief (1) • Police Lieutenants (3) • Three Roundy's credit cards issued to the City of Richfield Recreation Services Department. The credit cards to be maintained by the following: • Recreation Administration Division • Wood Lake Nature Center Division • Ice Arena Operation Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. ATTEST: Debbie Goettel, Mayor • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM # 6G REPORT # 7 ~~ STAr~r REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: BARRY FRITZ, PUBLIC SAFETY DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~`~_~'~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution amending a joint powers agreement that extends Richfield's contract with the Metro Gang Strike Force, through the Office of Justice Programs, MN Department of Public Safety. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution amending the contract with the State of Minnesota, Office of Justice Programs, by: • Extending the Joint Powers agreement, Metro Gang Strike Force through 2009; and, • Accepting additional grant funds for an officer on the Metro Gang Strike Force during that period of time. II. BACKGROUND The 2005 Minnesota State Legislature created the Gang and Drug Oversight Council to provide guidance related to the investigation and prosecution of gang and drug crime. The Oversight Council was tasked with the responsibility of developing a statewide strategy to ameliorate the harm caused by gangs and drugs. The Legislature also appropriates funding to support the development of this statewide strategy and specifically for "grants to the combined operations of the Criminal Gang Strike Force and Narcotics Task Forces." 0113 Resolution Extending Metro Gang Strike Force Agreement The Department of Public Safety, in collaboration with the Oversight Council, has formed multi jurisdictional task and strike forces, including a metro gang strike force. "Metro" is defined as the seven county metro area. The Metropolitan gang strike forces operate under a Joint Powers Agreement and are under the direction of a commander who reports to an Advisory Board comprised of the chief law enforcement officers (or their designees) of the participating agencies. All participating members have statewide jurisdiction but will remain employees of the contributing agency. Joint Powers Agreements have been created for the strike forces and they address common issues, including but not limited to: purpose, scope of work, work location, command structure, terms of participation, terms of reimbursement, designation and duties of a fiscal agent and use. of forfeited assets. Richfield Public Safety submitted an application to place an officer on the Strike Force, and, at the Strike Force Advisory Board meeting on March 19, 2008, the board voted to approve the application. City Council approved the resolution allowing participation in the Gang Strike Force and acceptance of grant funds on 4/22/08. Grant funds were previously paid Richfield for placement of an officer on the strike force in the amount of $37,500 for the period April 1, 2008 through December 31, r 2008. The amended contract would cover the period January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 for reimbursement and compensation of $87,500. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Legislators and law enforcement realize that to effectively combat gangs, the resources of a single agency are inadequate. They are limited by resources and jurisdictional boundaries. Multi-jurisdictional strike forces combine resources and eliminate jurisdictional boundaries. With the placement of an officer on the Strike Force, Richfield will benefit from the resources of 33 officers and 11 law enforcement agencies. • A resolution must be signed allowing the City of Richfield to enter into a joint powers agreement to place an officer on the Metro Gang Strike Force and to accept grant funds,for the project. Since this is an amendment to the original joint powers agreement, it too must be approved by resolution. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Richfield selected Officer Greg Peterson to be on the Strike Force. C. FINANCIAL • Total obligation if the State for all compensation and reimbursements to the Grantee .(Richfield Public Safety) .under this grant contract will not exceed $87,500. • The expiration date will be December 31, 2009, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. AL1rxNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council could disapprove the resolution which would void the agreement. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution .number • Copy of amendment to the grant contract. • Copy of previously approved grant contract. • Copy of previously approved Joint Powers Agreement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None • ~~-- i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE GRANT CONTRACT BETWEEN MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS AND RICHFIELD PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT EXTENDING THE GRANT AND ACCEPTANCE OF ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDS FOR RICHFIELD'S PARTICIPATION IN A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND PARTICIPATION IN THE METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE INITIATIVE WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Public Safety, Office of justice Programs is the agency responsible for the administration of the Metro Gang Strike Force; and WHEREAS, the STATE is authorized to make contracts from state funds to qualified applicants; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department (hereinafter called the GRANTEE), is authorized to accept state funds for special projects and approved the original agreement in April of 2008; and, WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Public Safety Department is willing to continue its participation in the Metro Gang Strike Force and Narcotics Task Force; and, WHEREAS, GRANTEE represents that it is duly qualified and willing to carry out the project described above. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield will extend the grant agreement with the Office of Justice Programs in the Minnesota Department of Public Safety through December 31, 2009 and will accept additional grant funds to support the City's participation in the Metro Gang Strike Force initiative. Further, that the City of Richfield, Department of Public Safety, continue its participation in the Joint Powers Agreement to become a party to the Metro Gang Strike Force. Steve Devich, City Manager, is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on .behalf of the City of Richfield, Department of Public Safety. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AMENDMENT N0.2 TO GRANT CONTRACT 2008-MGSF-00600/6300-2672 ~riginal Contract Effective date: -April L 2008 Original Contract Amount: $30.000.00 Ongmal Contract Expiration date: December 31.2008 Previous Amendment(s) Total : $7.500.00 Amended Contract Expiration date: December 31, 2009 Current AmendmentAmount: $50.000.00. Total .Contract Amount: $87.500.00 .This amendment is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Public Safety, Office of Justice Programs, 444 Cedar Street, Suite 100, St: Paul, Minnesota 55101-5100 ("State") and -City of Richfield, . Department of Public Safety, 6700 Portland Avenue, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 ("Grantee"). Recitals 1" The State has a grant contract. with the Grantee identified as Grant Contract 2008-MGSF-00600/6300-2672 for the purpose of funding the combined operations of the Criminal Gang Strike Force and Narcotics Task Forces. 2 The. State and the Grantee have agreed that additional time and funds are necessary for the satisfactory completion of this project. 3 The State and the Grantee are willing to amend the Original Grant Contract and previous Amendments as stated below." Grant Contract Amendment n this Amendment deleted contract terms will be struck. out and the added contract terms will be underlined. " . RECISION 1. Clause 1, "Term of Grant Contract", Section 1.2 of the Original Grant Contract is amended as follows: 1.2 Expiration date. Dec~~~ ?' , ''-885 December 31.2009, or until all obligations have been satisfactorily ..fulfilled, whichever occurs first. REVISION 2. Clause 4, "Consideration and Payment", Section 4.1, Paragraphs (1) and (3) of the Original Grant Contract Amendment No. 1 is amended as follows: (1) Compensation. The Grantee will be reimbursed an amount not to exceed Q~~~-~8~8-$87,500.00 according to the breakdown of costs contained in Revised Exhibit A, which is attached and incorporated into this grant contract. The Grantee will submit any revisions to Revised Exhibit A as described in Section 4.2 (2) of this grant contract and the revised budget must be approved by the State's Authorized.Representative before any expenditures Tray be made based on the revised budget. (3) Total Obligation. The total obligation of the State for all compensation and reimbursements to the Grantee under this grant contract will not exceed ~3-7;588:98-$87.500.00. $20,000.00 is available from April 1; 2008 through l~eca-~'~r 31; 239$ June30, 2009. ~-198:99 $42,500.00 is available from~July 1, 2008 through ~~-r.~~r 31; 2-98 December 31, 2009. $25,000.00 is available from July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009. Grant Amendment 05/07 1 ~3 AMENDMENT NO.2 TO GRANT CONTRACT.2008-MGSF-00600/6300-2672 e Original Grant Contract and any previous amendments are incorporated into this amendment by reference. 1. ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION 3. STATE AGENCY Individual cert~es that funds have been eni7imbered as • required by ~Llinn. Stat. ~§ 16f1,1S and 16C.05. Signed: BY:: (with delegated authority) Date: Title: ~ • Grant Contract No.: 2008-MGSF-00600/6300-2672 Date: 2. GRANTEE The Grantee ce es tha the appropriate person(s) " have executed t ' contr ton behalf of th rantee a required ~,upp ,' ble rticles, bylaws, re Itrti`~, ~ r o finances. ~~ - it ~, R Title: City Manager 'g` Date: 12 /30/2008 _ //~~ ~" By: ~!~~ t~l" .. ~- Title: Direc or. of P lic_Safety- Distributions DPS/FAS • Grantee State's Authorized Representative i Grant Amendment 05/07 Vrt'ILrC Vr ~JV~7 1 IVG r~wv~~~w~v ~ -- ~: ~. ~- ~C~-~ JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING THE METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE This is an agreement between the political sub-divisions and municipalities referenced in Appendix A. and (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Parties"). WHEREAS, the Parties each have law enforcement agencies (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Agencies") with police powers within their respective jurisdictions and these Agencies are responsible for the enforcement of all. laws dealing. with gang or related criminal violations in their respective jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Parties, through their Agencies, wish to form a joint strike force for the purpose of more efficiently and effectively enforcing laws dealing with any and all crimes committed by gangs or for the benefit of gangs by investigating and prosecuting such criminal activity, especially felonies that have the likelihood of being related to gang crime; and; NOW THEREFORE, Pursuant to the authority contained in Minnesota Statutes §471.59, commonly known as the Joint Powers Act, and §299A.641 subd.3, and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained and the benefits that each party shall-derive hereby, the Parties agree as follows: 1. PURPOSE OF THE AGREEMENT The purpose of this agreement is to establish the Metro Gang Strike Force as an organization to coordinate efforts to prevent gang activity and investigate, apprehend and prosecute those individuals engaged in such crimes which could be defined as gang related or crimes committed for the benefit of a gang and to define the rights and obligations of the Parties with respect to the duties and activities performed by the Metro Gang Strike Force throughout the term of the agreement. 2. METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE The Metro Gang Strike Force (hereinafter "MGSF") is hereby established by the Parties to coordinate efforts to prevent gang activity; and investigate, apprehend and prosecute those individuals engaged in such crimes which could be defined as gang related or crimes committed for the benefit of a gang. Other cities, counties, and public entities may apply for membership in the MGSF by formal application to the Gang and Drug Oversight Council (described herein) and the Commissioner of Public Safety. Submission of an application constitutes agreement by the applicant to all provisions set forth in this agreement and the recommendation of at least one fulltime licensed peace officer to the MGSF. Participation in the MGSF must be recommended by the Gang and Drug Oversight Council and approved by the Commissioner of Public Safety. ~~ • 3. GOOD FAITH The Parties and the Agencies shall cooperate and use their best efforts to ensure that the various provisions of this Agreement are fulfilled and to undertake ' resolution of disputes, if any, in good faith and in an equitable and timely manner. 4. TERM OF AGREEMENT/TERMINATION 4.1 The Initial Term of this Agreement shall be fora 12 month and three day period from December 29, 2005 through December 31, 2006. 4.2 This Agreement shall automatically renew each year ("Renewal Term") for up to five years unless the MGSF Advisory Board and the Gang and Drug Oversight Council determine adequate funding is not provided by the Minnesota Legislature and/or the Parties to this Agreement. Notice of inadequate funding must be provided to the Parties at least sixty (60) days prior to termination of this agreement. This Agreement will not automatically renew if a majority of the then-current members give written notice to the other Parties of their intent to not renew at least sixty (60) days prior to the end of the then-current Initial Term or any Renewal Term. 4.3 A member may withdraw, within the terms of this agreement, upon sixty (60) days notice to the other Parties. 4.4 Upon withdrawal of a Party, all property of the withdrawing Party shall be returned. A withdrawing Party shall have no claim to any property or assets owned or held by the MGSF. 4.5 In the event that the MGSF is dissolved, all property owned by the MGSF shall be distributed to the Agencies currently participating in the MGSF. The MGSF Board will determine the distribution of property on a pro-rated basis, based upon the length of participation of Agencies and the number of Agency officers assigned to the MGSF. Property of the Agencies or the Parties that had been loaned for use by the MGSF shall be returned to the contributor. 5. MGSF GOVERNING BOARDS 5.1 The Gang and Drug Oversight Council, as established by the act of the 2005 Minnesota Legislature (Minnesota Statute §299A.641), will approve an overall budget for the Metro Gang Strike Force and provide strategic guidance related to the investigation and prosecution of crimes committed. by a gang or for the benefit of a gang by the MGSF. Authority, composition and duties of the Gang and Drug Oversight Council is established and defined in Minnesota Statutes §299A.641. 5.2 An Advisory Board (hereinafter "Board"), consisting of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer, or their designee, of each participating Agency will be established to select and supervise the Metro Commander, approve the selection of participating officers, set the priorities for the work of the MGSF and approve all expenditures of the Metro Gang Strike Force. The Board will ~~~~ develop By-Laws to address Board operations and specific policies and • procedures unique to the MGSF. 5.3 The Board will elect a chair and vice chair from among its members. 5.4 Each agency on the board will have one vote. A simple majority will rule. In the event of a tie vote, the vote of the chair will control. 5.5 The Board shall convene on, at minimum, a quarterly basis to review the operations, program business, and status of program goals of the MGSF. The Board has the authority to meet more often if the chair determines it is appropriate. 6. MGSF OPERATIONS 6.1 Daily operation and responsibility for carrying out the operations of the MGSF shall be under the direction and command of the Metro Commander. The Metro Commander will work in cooperation with the Statewide Coordinator. 6.2 The Board will select the Metro Commander and the Metro Commander serves at the pleasure of the Board. The Commander will be expected to provide effective leadership and administrative coordination; direct officer assignments; oversee field operations, foster communication and cooperation with other law enforcement agencies in and outside the geographic region; and identify and facilitate necessary training for MGSF officers. 6.3 The Metro Commander will plan and coordinate case activities and direct investigative activities of the MGSF based on intelligence provided by the Agencies, with priorities as determined by the Advisory Board acting in concert with the strategy, policies and guidance established by the Gang and Drug Oversight Council. 6.4 To protect the integrity of investigations and to ensure that the goals, operations and objectives of the MGSF are properly represented; requests for information by the media will be handled by the Metro Commander or their specific designee in accordance with a media policy established by the Board. 7. FUNDING 7.1 MGSF operational requirements, to include sworn personnel and necessary equipment, will be funded first, to the extent possible, by grants as authorized by the Commissioner of Public Safety upon recommendation of the Gang and Drug Oversight Council, and by any other funding sources recognized by state statute or received by any of the members or Agencies on behalf of the MGSF. 7.2 All assets received through seizure, forfeiture, restitution or fines that are derived from the operation of the MGSF will remain the property of the Strike W ~ / Force and will be used for the furtherance of MGSF efforts. In cases where • the MGSF cooperates with another jurisdiction, such as another task force or local state or federal agency, the Metro Commander and representatives of other agencies will negotiate a split based upon the amount of effort expended in the investigation and will document their agreement. In the case of federal forfeiture actions, established .federal rules shall be followed. Policies regarding the collection, reporting, use and disbursement of all MGSF assets referenced above, will be dictated by the Board subject to compliance with applicable laws. 7.3 Participating agencies agree to individually assume any of their remaining Agency funding deficits incurred by the assignment of their Agency personnel or equipment to the MGSF, provided that nothing herein precludes any Agency from contributing funds, equipment, or in-kind services in excess of that necessary to fund its own deficit. Grant funds allocated to each Agency may be used to cover salary, overtime and vehicle costs. 7.4 The Advisory Board shall select a fiscal agent. The Fiscal Agent shall be charged with the responsibility of serving as the depository for MGSF funds, procuring and paying for budgeted services and supplies, as approved by the Metro .Gang Strike Force Advisory Board, keeping all financial records and filing required reports in connection with grant funding. The Fiscal Agent shall be responsible for strict accountability of all MGSF funds, and for the • reporting of all receipts and disbursements. The Board shall receive a quarterly financial report of all receipts and expenditures and current fund balances from the Fiscal Agent. In addition, the books, records and reports shall be open to inspection by the Agencies at all reasonable times. 8. MGSF PERSONNEL 8.1 The Parties shall recommend licensed peace officers or qualified federal law enforcement officers, as appropriate, and other personnel to the MGSF as agreed upon to carry out its purpose and to perform its responsibilities under this Agreement. Officers must be approved by the Board. 8.2 All personnel assigned to the MGSF ("MGSF Personnel") shall remain employees of the agency assigning the personnel and shall not be considered temporary or permanent employees of any of the other Parties or the MGSF for any purpose whatsoever or be entitled to tenure rights or any rights or benefits by way of workers compensation, re-employment. insurance, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, severance pay, PERA or any other right or benefit of another of the Parties. The Parties acknowledge their individual responsibility to provide all salary compensation and fringe benefits to their employees while performing services on behalf of the MGSF. Benefits may include, but are not limited to, health care, disability insurance, life insurance, re-employment insurance, FICA, Medicare, PERA, vacation, sick leave, and unpaid leave of absences. 10~~ 1 8.3 Parties assigning peace officers as MGSF Personnel must provide each peace officer with a vehicle and equipment necessary to perform required police functions. 8.4 As directed by the Metro Commander, MGSF Personnel will be responsible for gang organg-related prevention activities; directed patrol; and investigations; including intelligence management, case development, and the presenting of cases for charging to the appropriate prosecuting authority. MGSF Personnel may also assist other law enforcement agencies in surveillance and undercover operations. MGSF Personnel will work cooperatively with assisting agencies. 8.5 As authorized by Minnesota Statute §299A.641 subd. 6, law enforcement officers participating in the MGSF have statewide jurisdiction to conduct criminal investigations and have the same powers of arrest as those possessed by a sheriff. 8.6 All MGSF Personnel shall follow rules of conduct and operational guidance developed by the Gang and Drug Oversight Council and any policies and procedures adopted by the Board. Where Agency rules, regulations and policies of the Parties conflict with those established by the MGSF, the Board will be notified and a resolution will be negotiated between the MGSF and the affected Agency. • 8.7 The Metro Commander or a designee shall refer disciplinary matters involving MGSF Personnel to the person's originating agency for investigation and disposition unless, based on the judgment of the Metro Commander, or his/her designee, a particular matter represents probable cause for the issuance of a criminal complaint, in which case the matter shall be referred directly to an external law enforcement agency for investigation, provided the person's agency head is notified in advance thereof. The Metro Commander may exclude contributed members from further involvement in the MGSF subject to review by the Board and approval of the contributing agency. 9. LOCATION MGSF activities shall take place out of a central location to be agreed to by the Agencies and with the concurrence of the Gang and Drug Oversight Council. 10. ADVISOR The Board shall designate an attorney to advise the Board and provide civil legal advice to the MGSF, as and if required. 11. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Disputes between MGSF personnel that cannot be resolved among MGSF Personnel shall be referred to the Metro Commander, whose decision shall be final. (o G-~o • 12. INSURANCE 12.1 Liability coverage. MGSF will maintain liability coverage with the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) with a limit of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence, under standard LMCIT liability coverage forms. Alternately, MGSF may maintain equivalent private liability insurance coverage. Such coverage may be provided through separate policies for commercial general liability (CGL), public officials' errors and omissions, and law enforcement liability. All liability insurance policies must comply with the following requirements: Each policy shall have a limit of at least $1 million per occurrence. If the policy contains a general aggregate limit, the general aggregate limit shall be not less than $2,000,000. The CGL insurance shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury, and contractually-assumed liability. Each Party, and each Party's officers, employees, and volunteers, shall be named as additional covered parties on each policy. 12.2 Auto coverage. MGSF shall maintain automobile liability coverage with a limit of • not less than $1,000,000 each accident. If such insurance contains a general aggregate limit, the general aggregate limit shall be not less than $2,000,000. The insurance shall cover liability arising out of any auto, including owned, hired, and non-owned autos. Each Party, and each Party's officers, employees, and volunteers, shall be named as additional covered parties on the policy. 12.3 Property coverage. MGSF will maintain all risk property coverage for full replacement value on property owned by MSGF. The insurer shall waive subrogation against any Party. 12.4 Workers compensation. If MGSF at any time hires employees, MGSF will immediately acquire and maintain workers compensation coverage. 13. INDEMNIFICATION AND WAIVER 13.1 MGSF waives any claim against any Party for damage to MGSF's property or injury o MGSF's employees, even if that damage or injury was caused by the negligence of the Party or the Party's officers, employees, or volunteers. .Each Party waives any claim against MGSF or against any other Party for damage to the Party's property or injury to the Party's employees, even if that damage or injury was caused by the negligence of the other Party or the • Party's officers, employees, or volunteers. 13.2 MGSF will defend and indemnify any Party against any claims brought or actions filed against the Party or their respective officers, employees, or volunteers, for injury to, death of, or damage to the property of any other person or persons, fo C~ ~ i t arising from decisions of the MGSF Board or from any operations for which MGSF is responsible. Any Party, officer, employee or volunteer subject to such claim shall provide complete disclosure and cooperation in the defense of the claim. 13.3 In the event that the total liability of the MGSF, its Parties, and their officers., employees, and volunteers for claims arising from the activities of the Task Force should exceed the coverage limit or in the event of liability that is not covered by the MGSF's coverage, the parties agree to share that excess or uncovered liability equally; but this does not include the liability of any individual officer, employee, or volunteer which arises from his or her own malfeasance, willful neglect of duty, or bad faith. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed as a waiver by the MGSF or by any Party of any.applicable liability limit, immunity, or defense. This expressly includes the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and any other applicable state or federal statute or case law It is understood and agreed that each Party's liability shall be limited by the .provisions of Minnesota Statute Ch. 466 (Tort Liability, Political Subdivisions) or other applicable law. In the event of any claims or actions filed against the MGSF and/or any individual Party for any operations for which the MGSF is responsible, nothing in this agreement shall be construed to allow a claimant to • obtain separate judgments or separate statutory liability caps from the MGSF and/or individual Parties. The. MGSF is intended as a separate liability entity which limits the liability of individual Parties. 14. NOTICE Any notice to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be made by personal delivery or by first class mail to the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of each participating agency. 15. EFFECTIVE DATE This Joint. Powers Agreement will become effective upon the date of execution of a participating Agency by their duly authorized official, but in no event prior to December 29, 2005. 16. ADDITION AND REMOVAL OF PARTIES LISTED IN APPENDIX A Appendix A to this Agreement lists the Parties and contains signatures of representatives of each Party. Appendix A may be amended by the Board, upon recommendation of the Gang and Drug Oversight Council and approval of the Commissioner of Public Safety, without additional signatures by representatives of the Parties. Amendments to Appendix A may be made only to add additional parties or remove withdrawing parties. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties listed in Appendix A to this Agreement, by action of their governing bodies, or their authorized designees, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statute §471.59. W v '~~ JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT CREATING THE METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE Appendix A IN WITNESS THEREOF, the City of Richfield by action of their governing bodies, or their authorized designees, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statute §471.59. STEVEN L. DEVICH CITY MANAGER • CITY OF RICHFIELD • • ..t+" AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # E)H REPORT # $ J CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, ,TITLE • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAFF REPORT KRISTIN ASHER, CITY ENGINEER ~s ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution accepting a donation of a permanent sidewalk easement at 6320 Lyndale Avenue South. ~~~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution accepting the donation of a permanent sidewalk easement Located at 6320 Lyndale Avenue South. • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY II. EACKGROUND As part of the May 22, 2007 regular City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to obtain the necessary sidewalk easement to accommodate a widened sidewalk along the 6300 block of Lyndale Avenue as part of the reconstruction project. Staff worked with property owners on the west side of Lyndale Avenue and. was able to receive the five foot easement as a donation. Attached is a letter from the City and IRS Form 8283 Noncash Charitable Contributions acknowledging the donation of the easement at 6320 Lyndale. Both items were requested from the property owner. These acknowledgements do not represent agreement with the claimed fair market value. 0113Easement .,~" • The City Council formally accepts donations made to the City by • resolution. B. CRITICAL ISSUES The, property owner is awaiting the letter and form before they give the City a signed easement to record. C. FINANCIAL. • Accepting the donation has no financial impact. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney is will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMIVIENDATION~S~ • Do not accept the donation at this time; however, the sidewalk work is complete. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • Letter from the City acknowledging the donation • Tax Form 8283 - Noncash Charitable Contribution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES. EXPECTED AT MEETING • -None expected. • ~,. UJ n -' • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A PERMANENT SIDEWALK EASEMENT ALONG THE PROPERTY AT 6320 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 reads in part as follows: Any city, county, school district or town may accept a grant or devise of real or personal property and maintain such property for the benefit of its citizens in accordance with the terms prescribed by the donor. Nothing. herein shall authorize such acceptance or use for religious or sectarian purposes. Every. acceptance shall be by resolution of the council adopted by two-thirds majority of its members, expressing such terms in full; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield initiated the 6300 Block of Lyndale Reconstruction Project; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desired to replace the sidewalks as part of the street reconstruction; and WHEREAS, TAG Company is the property owner. at 6320 Lyndale Avenue South; and .WHEREAS, TAG Company donated the necessary permanent sidewalk easement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield accepts the permanent sidewalk easement donated by TAG Company along the property at 6320 Lyndale Avenue South. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk (~N-a Executive Department wwuv.cityofrichfield.org January 13, 2009 MAYOR DEBBIE GOETTEL CITY COUNCIL ' PAr ELUOTr TAG Company, LLP TOM FITZHENRY 3401 Colfax Avenue South SUZANNE M.SANDAHL FRED L. WROGE, JR. Mlnneap011S MN 55408 CITY MANAGER STEVEN L. DEVICH Re: Property located at 6320 Lyndaie Avenue South, Richfield MN 55423 Donation of Permanent Sidewalk Easement Dear TAG Company, LLP: This letter is written to acknowledge TAG. Company's gift of an easement over real property, as described in the attached easement. document, to the .City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"). The City-received TAG Company's gift on November 12, 2008. The. City has not provided any goods or services in consideration, in whole or in part, for TAG Company's gift. Sincerely, Steven Devich Richfield City Manager SD:ka Attachment • The Urban Hometown 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE -RICHFIELD -MINNESOTA - 55423 - 612.861.9790 -FAX 612.861.9796 www.cityofichfield.org AN EQUAL OPPORTUNf7Y EMPLOYER ~ ~ ~3 • ~IDE~-'f~K EA~~M~IVTS THIS` INSTRtTMEI~TT is giveri~ day cif' X008 T,A+~a Compai2~ LLF, a Iv~nnesota limited liability partnership,.. grantor, in favor of CITY OF RICiIBLD, a Minnesota municipal corporation (``C~ty"~,, Crrantee. Recitals A. Crrarator is the fee owner of the foTTowing describedreal .property in the pity cif R2chhelda County-of Henuepxn and State ofl~~Fiuriesota (the.~Pray~~~,~„), That,part of Cro~T~r~uent Z4t 3, ~~ctiorz 28, 'I'~wriship ~:a Rai~:ge 24, Tying youth of the S:oitth,lne of the plat of~`'Ra3~'s T;ynnhurst 2"~ Aricii~on" end East of a Iine 12~ feet E of and.: as measured afi right angles to the eix4~~on South. of the West line of Block 1, "Ray's Lymihurst 2°a ~cldit~n"., .and NurEla o~ a line descnbe~I as be~nni~g at a point ozz the East line~~af said ~iovc~~u~.ent I,ot 3 distant.l.~bQ.94 feet South afthe Northeast coiner thereof, thence ~7est :at right: arrgTes to said East line 1 X6.5 feet; thence North at riglrt argyles T b feet;; thence Vest. at right angles to a~n ntc~acLtior~ witl~.the extension South of the ~7est line of sand Black 1.. B, Crrantnr. desires to grant m the. C"rry certazn sidewalk easements, according tQ the ternis and conditions contained h~~~;~. "Terms of Easement 1. grant of Perrrnanent Easement. For good and: vaiual3:e consideration, receipt of s~~hic11 is acknac~vladged liy Gxantor, Grantor quit~latns and conveys to #1ie City the foilo~vrig easement {tt~e "Ease~en~").: • ~ N " `{" A i,o~yetual, non-exclusive easement for public side~!a%lc purposes in, antler and upon that portion of the t'ropertp identified. as "Proposed P~f:~~~~ent Sidewalk Easement Area" on Exhibit A attached hereto and legally describeci:as follows (the'"Easement Area"j: A strip of la7d S.t}~ feet in width over that part of the Property, the: ea.~[G~ly line of wlaieh is' costiguotss: with a'Iine drawn parallel with anal distant 33.04 feet west of the east line of Government-Lot. 3; Section 28,;'Toumship.2~, :Range 24;:Hennepin Count, Minnesota. Sa%d. strip of :land is to .extend by its full v,~dth from the north..line of the Property, to. the ;south. line of the Property.. ?. Giant of Temuor Easement.. For. good arsd 'valuable ,consideration, receipt of which is aclCnovvledged 'by Grantor, Grantor quitclaims anal. conveys to the City the:.following easement ,(the `KTemporary Easement': A ferrsptirary~ xron: exclusive easement for construetzori, purposes- sn, -under and. upon that portion of the Property cl~~t;fed as "Proposed Temporary Consixuction Easement: Area"' ors Exhibit A attacliecl hereto-.and legally descriled,as follows (the "Temporary E`asemetst Area'}z . A. strip of Land S:OQ feet in: width over that part of the 'raperty the easterl~F line of which is contiguous with the westerly Brie of `the: above described Easement Area. laid strip of Land is to extend by itS' full, w%dth from the north lzsle a~ the: P`~pertj= to tfie:. south line of the Property`. :Said temporary easement vuill commence on file :date of this Agreement anal-expire on .December 3, >ZO~~, ~.. Scow ~ifEas~~~l,~~ts. Easement gl~~tedptu~t to Sectors 1 herein includes the r%ght of public. ingress and egresa and'the: right of the City, rte contrac`to .s, agents, acid emplr}~ees #o enter the :Easement Area at all. reasonable tames: far the purpose of constructing,: ~~~,atng; maintaining, repairing and replacing ;a public siclewallc within the- Easement Area. T1e'Teii~;poxary Easerrient granted pursuant to Section Z;heren includes the right. ofthe ~tyy "its contra~,lv~~ agents, and employees to enter upors the Temporary Easement Area at all reasonable tirses fAr the purpose of consixuction grading, sloping; and restoration purposes, as we11 as the right to deposit construction materials upon `the Temp.~;~,~ Easement. Area. Crratrtor hereby conveys all grasses' shrubs, trees and. natural growth now existing ozt =the TeL~.y~~ary Easement .Area. 'Grantee sha11 have. the right to use d ren3ove all earthen materials, structures,.. i;~~~,~u,~ements .and obstcuctans which lie with%r~ the boundaries of the: Temporary Easement. Area,. The. easements granted herein also- includes. file right to cuts .trim,; or remove: from 'the Easement Area and (during: the term. of the Temmporary ;Easement, the Temporary Easement Area all trees,: shrubs; or other vegetatiorf as in the' grantee's jucigrnent unreasonably interfere wi'Fh the Easement, (~~-~ 4. Sadewalk Ivlaintenanee. T`he City aaffrees to rnantain the sclev,~ll~ .in the .;Easement Area,. Ynclurling.: but not' united to. the responsibility :to :remove: snow and 'ice, S. {3ther~ Uses of the EaseYi-ient area. ~~tli respect to the Easement .arid. the: Temporary Easement cledicatec~ above,. the osier of the Pr~,p~~ ~,~ xefans. She ri~h~t tQ use :all property :above and .below the surface o£ the Easement Area: for ar~~` 'purpose: not nc~rissten~t with the .tights herek~y grariteci, iriclufling; ~vi#houf lunation, the. ~F~~~: of easements for uadergrourid titrlties, the installation or operation of t~vhich w-i~l not materially interfere: vitl the ~iLy's use of the Easement Area. 6, VkTarranfv of Title. Crxantor wa1~~~~, that it is the owner of the Praperiy and has the right, title and capacity~to convey to the pity 4~e Eas:,~.~~~f herein. Z, Binding E#f'ect. The: terms and conelitions of this instrcanent sha,Il rrzn with the lance and' be int~g Qn the ~rant~r, ids .suo~essors artd assigns; and shall inure fo fhb benefit of e Czty.. ~TAT'E u,~t;l~ TAI SUE HERE~?NT I~t~I~E • T`A~ G~iuIPAN~ T;I~P By Its: STATE C31" it~ll~NE~4T`A ss.:x ~t~UI'~TY C3F The foregoixig irtsirunientwas>acknovvleclgedbef~are.r~teti clay of , X008, by ,'the Of T'AG Corrzpany LL;P. a Minnesota lrrtited fiabilit~ partnership:, on :behalf' of fine Im%ted liability . part~lershp. NQtar~ Public • r C 6 D Y 7 O E a -~~ p. ........... 3 9 n i Y 10 ~ ' l~ Lyndaie Avenue and tIV.63rd S#reet tMSB ProjecE No. t725~0U Date:213~s 70S Xenia avenue 6outh. Suite 300 ~B aaR>n~oi~, ~n~ spats Sheet and Utility lmpraven3ents TAG Company tLC w~vxcwsbenscom Parcel Sketch Parcef No. & !!!` C:~ty of Richfietd, Minneso#a 4 ~+=ra~~sctaioa - it&RASTRUCTURE+ ENC~IEERINQ pLANNIN(d COtSSTRUC7~N (o N - `~ (Rev. December 2005) b- ~ttacft to your tax return ~ you claimed a total deduction of over $5oc? far off contributed proper8y. Attachment D....~.., - : of the 3reasur~ Sequence Na. 't ~rJ irherna! i~wenue Serv!ae ®SSG' Se,,a:.~.:e InStructiOn6. Name(s) shown on your income tax return [dsntifying number '~Afi Company, ALP, 34fl'l Coiyax ~SVenue S€a., t~°anneapvtts, FAN 664fl8 Plate. Figure the amount of your contribution deduct€on before completing th€s forth. See your tar, return instructions. ~ectioln A. 6arated Praper[y of ~.s,€YE)€? or less-and Certain Puhticly Traded Sectt~afaes-List in-this section oflty items (or groins of similar items) for which ~rou ctai!rted a declucti©n of $b,fltlQ or Tess. Also, list certain publicly traded securities even.if the deduction is mere than ~5,t}gE! {see instructions). trY#ar~a~ion o~ t~onated Property-€f you need mare space, attach a statesr!ent:' {a} Name and address of the {b} Descr!ption of donated prcperhr j {For a donated vehicle, enter the year, make, model, condition, and mileage, donee organization and attach Form 1098 C if required) _ p Ctty flfi RiCiFf€eI€j, 67flfl Pmrtfand ~~renum, E'ctchfiela' , MN 'f,'t fl3 square £sot pes-marw_nt sidewalk easement 66423 . g Cif}+ of 12ich~etd, 67flfl r?ortfand l~~+enus, fi`sch'ieefd , lNfl~ '€,fl33 s~eaare loot te;r;porary cgnsu°uctioh sasernent x6423 c ! . Plote. !f the amount you claimed as a dedt~-ction for an item is ~5t3{} or toss, you do not have to complete columns d), (s), and (f). {c} Date of the ~ {d} Data acquired {e} How acqured ~ {t} Gonor's cost ~ {g} Fair market value {fe} ~r4ethod used to determine contribution { by donor (mc., yr.) by donor or ad}usted basis (see instructions} the fair market value A J j ;3art ~t proPertlrE ~ ~ ~S,62fl.3fl ~artcet approach 13 E Part ref ~Sra{sertvi ~ I 't,83fl.2? lGiaricet ap}arrsael~ ~ tease rate ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,! ~ ~ E i Partial interests and Restricted Use Property--Complete tines 2a thrdugh 2e if you gave less than an entire interest in a property fisted in Part t. Complete tines va through 3c if canesitlons inrere placed on a contribution fisted in Fart l; also attach she required statement see instructions}. , 2a Enter the iet#er from Part l that identifies the property for which you gave €ess than ar} entire 'snterest - a, ~ tf Part 4i app€ies to more than one property, attach a separate statement. ~ Tota# amot:tnt c€aimed as a deduct}on far the property. fisted in Part l: {1j_ For this tax year. - 2fl,~~ifl.67 . . {2~ For any prior tax years - c Name and address of each organization to wh€ch any such contribution was made to a prior year (complete only if different from the donee organization above): Name of chariFabie organization (cone) -~ Address (number, street, and room or suite no.) City or toem, state, and ZIP code d For tanglb€e property, enter the place where the property is located or kept - 6320 Eyndafe Rr~enue Sa., Rtcfafistd, t~id 65• e Name of any persoh, other than the donee organ¢ation, having. actual possession of the property - 3a is there a restriction, ether temporary or pertr:anenf, on the donee's right to use or dispose of the donated (Yesl.Plo property? € ~ ':~ fs Did you give to anyone (o#her this! the donee organlzat}on of another organization participating m+ith the donee organization €n cooperative fundraising} the right to the €ncome from the donated properly or to the possession of - the property, including the right to vote donated sec!.irities, to arguire the property by purchase or othenr~ise, or - fiQ ,rieginnaie tide norc;~n ha~nnn sLt ;h inr"rsmo ,r?OSveSSion r~r ;;nF;t i~ aC.o"yL~ira? . ~..._. r..,... _ is there a reurnr."fiction €imitina the donated property for a a3articutar use? / 'rar Paperwork Reduction tact Natioe, see separate instructions. Cat: No. 52299) ro:'m $~S3 (Rev. i2-2496) . ~ ~~~g Fcnr fi2fi3 (3ev. t2-21)J5 Paae1 Nametsj shown an your income tar. n=tura - ~ f::b.,:::yittg number SectiotZ E. €3orcated F~raperty elver ~a,€P~ (except ~estalst Pf~bliety Traded Sec~erries)-L6st it th:s section anfy hems {or groups of similar 'stems} for which you claimed a deduction of more iFlan ~,5,{1Q0 per item or group (axcepi contribu5-ohs o€ cer~i^ puhlie#y traded securi~~ reported in Section A). An appraisal is generally required for.propery iisied to Section R (see instructions). istfat~t~aeiort on ®~rtatec# Pf ope- To b;r compieied by Fhe taxpi~ysr and/or the appraiser. . 4 Check the box that describes the Type of property donatee: ^ Art` (contr!bution of $20,000 ar mare) ^ Oualrf!ed Conservation Contribution ^ Equipment ^~ Art` (contrbution of less than $20,000} ~ Uther Rea! Estate ^ Securities ^ :Golisctibles" ^ lnteliectuai Peope.~-ty ^ Other 'Art includes paintings, sculptures, watercolors, prints, drawings, ceramics, antiques, decorative arts, textiles, carpets, silver; rare manvscripfis, histaricat memorabilia, and other similar objects. "collectibles include coins, stamps, books, gems, jevrelry, sports memorabilia, dolts, etc., but not art as J~,:..~J above. bfote. in certain cases, you-must attach a qual;~ied appraisal of the propery. Sea instructions. ~ (a) Description of donated property (rf you need {b) 1f tangible property was donated, give a brief summary of the overall ioT AFPraised fair more space, attach a separate statement] physics! condition of the property at the time of the gft madcet value k.~ 5 foot side~ovalk eaa-etnenYad~aeeni to ~ynd i_and and sidsv¢ati; east of apartment c:ztnpEex i ~ $,620.34 . $ f 5 fnoY temisoras1r caststructifln easerstsrat & emus.. easemsnt to the east o€ eiorsate•3 Esermar-etst esrr '1,~9D.27 ~ ~. Q ~ !. {d} Data aogvired fel lio4v acquired ~ (>~j Donor's cost or 4si For bara_ain sales, errt~ See instructions by darror.(mo., yr.j by donor € aojvsted basis amount received (hl Amourrt claimed ass ~ {) Average trading price t deduction of secunties ~! f # ( i i ! I ~E i I I 4 l ~) ! ~ i ~ ~ } "'(` ~axpa~ser (E?orra~ Simi-.:..arts-L€st each; iis*n "sr~ct~~ed in Paez 1 move That ti"le appraisal ideriti~ies as having a value o€ ~5~E3 or less: See instructions. • i declare .hat the foRa~ving item(s) included in .Part 9 above has to #iie ts~..st of my knowledge and bel'sef an appraised value of not mare than X600 (per item}. Enter identifying let#er from Part f and describe the speci{c item. See instructions. - Signature of tax~ay..r (donor}. ~ ~ Date ~ ff3aclaraf~€sn ref ~ppt ~aisar t devlare tha# t am hat the donor, #ne do.~, a.partt: to the transaction in which the donor acquired the property, employed by, or reiaied #o any of the foregoing persons, or marzled to any parson who is n?lated to any of the foregoing persons. And, if regularly used by the donor, donee, or pa~ty to the transaction, l perFom~+ed the rrajor'ty of my apFraisats during my tax yearfor o#her persons. , Also, E declare that [hold ms5elf out to the public as an appraise; a.petorm apprasals on a regular bass; and that bQCause of my euali<i~tfons as described in the appraisal, d am qualified to make appraisals of the t~jpe of property being valued. l cerSiy that the appraisal #ees were not based on a ,.~, ,,:age of the appraised property vane. Furthem~rore, l understand that a #aise or #raudu(ent cn~erstatement af,the property value as described in fhe.qualined appraisal or this Form. 8283 may subject me to the penalty under section 6701 {a) (aiding and abeti<ng the ur~es',aterrsent of tGx iiabilsiy'i. in addi#ion, l urive;starrct that a substantial or gross valuation nitsstatement resulting from ~e appraisal of the value of the ,orope.:y that l know, or reasonablyshould know, ~+~v[d be used in txinne,^tion evith a r etu; n or Gaim #or refund, may subject me to.~the penally under section 6695A. 3 afnrm that I have not bsen barred from presenting eviders~ or testimony by itte Office of Professional Responsiblfity. Sigh ' ~ I'$al'a Signature ~ ~ _ e atte - Date - Business address Including rorrm o s~, n' ~ ldentitying number [~Celly~ Lindsir®rn, Certl~ecl £~ereral Rppraisea G.dy or town, state, and ZIP code ' 1f4~2 SeetvaeterPath, i,Rfoodbury, ;~ 55i2~ • . E?ortee ~dl4rao~larf~t~ie:~t To be compSeted by the charitable organization. This charitable organizat!on aciafo><vledges that it is a quala!ed organization under section 770(c) and that i# received the donated property as described in Section B, Par 1, above on the following date - lCldl~~''-~ f ~~ ~t~~i' F~rrhermore, this organization affirms that in the event if sells, exchanges, or otherwise disposes of the propery.described in Section B, Par f (or any potion thereof) within 3 years after the date o receipt, it will rile Form 82$2, Donee information Return, with the lRS and give the donor a copy of That form. This acknowledgment doss hat represent agreement writi the claimed lair market value. Does the organization intend to use the property for ar: unrelated use? , i.1 Yes ~ No . Narrw of chari~sble organisation (done) Employer i.:~..::.:.,~::an number Cl2~r ssf t"'eiChffeld Address (number, street, and roam or suite na.) I ity or town, s:-ta, ~d Zi_p cue 6700 ?sartland ~ventie ? Vi~ichfielcl , iVl€~ Sv423 Authorized signature i Trtie Date G! ~ ~> ~~~ Printed onRecytkdPaper Form u`Z~`io~ fRev. 12-2D~6j AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6I REPORT # 9 J REPORT PREPARED BY: NAME, TITLE • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: STAr~r~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: KAREN BARYON, ASSISTANT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . ~_~ SIGNATURE ~. ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider authorizing staff to submit an application for Housing and Urban Development . Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds in the amount not to exceed $1,500,000 through Hennepin County and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Finance Agency. By Motion: Approve attached resolution authorizing staff to submit an application for Housing and Urban Development Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds in the amount not to exceed $1,500,000 through Hennepin County and the Minnesota Housing II. BACKGROUND In response to the sweeping negative impacts associated with the mortgage foreclosure epidemic, the Federal Government approved a $700 billion bailout to assist financial institutions and communities directly impacted. Approximately $300 billion of those funds was allocated to the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to disperse the funds to the hardest hit communities throughout the nation. • The purpose of the funding is to stabilize neighborhoods in communities with significant numbers of foreclosures. 011309 NSP Foreclosure Funding Resolution Subsequently, Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota were allocated . approximately $3.9 million and $39 million, respectively, to be targeted to communities most significantly impacted. Hennepin County and the State each selected communities with the highest number of foreclosures by zip code. Richfield ranked among the top ten communities in Hennepin County, however, Richfield did not rank among the .top ten in the State. Hennepin County and the State submitted their applications to HUD in December 2008, indicating how the funds would be allocated and for what types of projects. In order to receive funds, the City of Richfield will need to submit an application to Hennepin County and to the State indicating how much money we are requesting, our propose method of using the funds, and specifying which areas in our community will be targeted. Since Richfield was not in the State's top ten zip codes, the application to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) will be to a competitive pool of funds of $2.9 million (allocated to the metro area), available metro-wide. Eligible uses for these funds include: • Down-payment assistance for purchase and/or rehabilitation of foreclosed homes; • Acquisition/rehabilitation of foreclosed homes; • Land banking (for future affordable housing); • Demolition of blighted structures; • Redevelopment. of demolished or vacant properties. Because these funds are being administered by HUD, there are a number of requirements attached to the use of these dollars, some of which are quite significant: • All expenditures of the NSP funds must serve households at or below 120% of area median income (AMI) ($97,080 for a family of four); • A minimum of 25% of the funds must be used to serve households at or below 50% AMI ($40,450 for a family of four); • Mechanisms must be put in place to ensure long-term affordability (from 5-20 years, depending on amount of subsidy provided); • The property must be acquired at 5-15% below the current appraised value; • All properties to be acquired must have a current appraisal (less than 60 days old), conducted by a Uniform Relocation Act-certified appraiser; • All properties 50 years old or older must be reviewed by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO); • All properties to be acquired are required to have a lead risk assessment, environmental review, energy audit, and property standards inspection completed prior to acquisition; • All properties to be acquired must be posted for public comment for a period of 30 days prior to purchase; • All properties receiving an NSP subsidy will be required to meet minimum rehab standards; • The re-sale price must be equal to or less than the cost to acquire and/or • rehabilitate; • Properties receiving adirect-subsidy (i.e., down-payment assistance or rehabilitation assistance) will be required to pay a portion of the appreciated value at the time of sale, equal to the percent the NSP funds represented in relation to the original purchase price, if the sale occurs during the affordability period; • Properties sold or transferred during the affordability period will be required to be sold to a household at or below 1.20% of the area median income; this will require additional monitoring and may involve future subsidy to the. property, which is unfunded. • Funds must be spent with 18 months of award. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is the City's policy to utilize grant funds for projects whenever available and practicable. • It is in the best interest of the City to ensure neighborhood stability and reduce blight. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • • Richfield has suffered a high number of foreclosures over the past two years (over 270) and is expected to have more over the next year. • Neighborhoods in which there are one or more foreclosed and vacant homes have detrimental impacts on the surrounding property values. • All uses of NSP funds are subject to long-term affordability requirements, meaning all subsequent sales of the .property during the affordability period must be made to households earning 120% of the area median income, or less. • No administrative funds are available for future administrative expenses relating to long-term affordability requirements. • Long-term affordability will range from a minimum of 5 years to a maximum of 20 years, depending on amount of subsidy. • All NSP funds directly allocated to the property owner will be subject to an appreciation-sharing provision with HUD. • All funds must be expended with 18 months of notice of award. • Future subsidy may be required to re-sell the property to a household at 120% AMI or less. C. FINANCIAL Project-specific administrative fees may be charged to the program. • D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Green building and energy-efficient practices will be incorporated into any rehabilitation or new construction, as practicable. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Do not authorize application for funding to Hennepin County and/or the State. • Authorize application in a different amount. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing application to Hennepin County and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 in HUD NSP funds. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A • ~T- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AFFIRMING AND RATIFYING CITY'S STAFF SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY-AND THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY FOR HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, the City of Richfield (the "City") is located within Hennepin County and is therefore eligible to access the Hennepin County and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) Neighborhood Stabilization Grant Funds; and WHEREAS, the City has the institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and WHEREAS, the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contracf agreements; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council affirms and ratifies the submittal of an application to Hennepin County and the MHFA on behalf of the City of Richfield, in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000, and authorizes the Mayor and City Manager to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 011309 NSP Foreclosure Funding Resolution ,. r AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 6J REPORT # 10 J JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: KRISTIN ASxER, CITY ENGINEER NAME, TITLE • • DEPARTMENT DIIZECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAr~r~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: ' Consideration of a work proposal presented by Braun Intertec to provide construction materials testing services on the 66th Street and Portland Avenue Project. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the hiring of Braun Intertec to provide construction materials testing services for the 66th Street and Portland Avenue Project. _., II. BACKGROUND On January 22, 2008, the Council awarded the contract for the reconstruction of the intersection at 66th Street and Portland Avenue. Braun Intertec submitted a proposal to provide construction materials testing services in an amount not to exceed $24,159.50. This limit was sef based on the assumption that the concrete work would be done in larger pours than was actually performed on the job. In order to follow the federal requirements for materials testing, Braun Intertec's staff was required to be on-site more than anticipated. The new not to exceed amount is proposed to be $38,000.00 and includes concrete testing anticipated in the spring. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY 0113Braun ,~ • The reconstruction of 66~' Street and Portland Avenue has been . identified as a priority in the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Council approval is required for expenditures over $25,000. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Materials testing is required by federal guidelines on all construction. C. FINANCIAL I • The estimated cost for materials testing is $38,000 to be paid for using Municipal State Aid Funds (Gas Tax). D. ,LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOIVIMENDATION(S~ • The Council may chose to take no action at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS . • May 2, 2008 Proposal for Cost Estimate Construction Materials Testing • December 12, 2008 Letter regarding Construction Testing Services • Change Order #1 -for work completed • Change Order #2 -for spring 2009 work to be completed VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES ExPEC i rli AT MEETING • None expected. • :, u aye * zoo ~ " ~ -~ ~ .. BRAUN INTERTEC May 2, 2008 Ms. Kristen Asher City of Richfieed 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 ~~-i Braun Intertee Corporation Phone: 651.487.3245 1826 Buerkle Road Fax: 651.487.1812 Saint Paul, MN 551 10 Web: braunintertec.com Project BL-06-02667D Re: Proposal, for Cost Estimate Construction Materials Testing Proposed Roundabout for 66th Street and Portland Avenue Richfield, Minnesota Dear: Ms. Asher We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal for construction materials testing services during utility installation, concrete placement and paving for the City of Richfield. Our Understanding of Project This project will include the construction of a roundabout, utility installation, concrete placement and pavement subgrade preparation and bituminous paving. Available Project Information This proposal is based on our review of the documents described below. If the project changes from the information provided in those documents, we may have to submit a revised scope of services and cost. ^ Project plans and specifications prepared by WSB and dated September 24, 2007. ^ Discussions with Jupe Hale of WSB Project Summary Project Overview This project consists of street and utility improvements and the construction of a roundabout at 66th Street and Portland Ave. in Richfield, Minnesota. ~ ~> >~-; t'` This project is a City of Richfield project with State funding. Projects that are constructed with State and Federal funding are required to perform Quality Control and Quality Assurance (QC/QA) testing in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) Schedule for Materials Control. Personnel with Mn/DOT certifications must complete the monitoring and testing. Also, since this project has State funding, an audit of the project may be conducted upon completion. The audit will include reviewing tests and- paperwork provided by your QC/QA representative. Braun Intertee Project Personnel For this project, we will provide technicians that are 1111n/DOT certified in each specialized field. Braun Intertee has many Mn/DOT certified employees. Within our metro offices our. field Technicians are trained in Mn/Dot disciplines such as: • Celebrating 50 years of growth through service and trust • ~p ~ ~ City of Richfield Project BL-06-02667D May 2, 2008 Page 2 ^ Aggregate Production ^ Grading & Base I ^ Grading & Base II ^ Concrete Field I ^ Concrete Field II ^ Concrete Plant I ^ Concrete Plant II ^ Bituminous Plant I ^ Bituminous Plant II ,Our pool of certified employees allows us to be responsive to project needs. Also, our project managers are currently working on several State-Aid and/or Federal Projects with requirements similar to your project. Scope of Services Soils The soil testing for this project will consist of the following: ^ Performing sand cone density tests on the utility trench backfill. ' Performing moisture content tests on all backfill materials. ^ Performing sand cone density tests on the road subgrade. ^ Perform Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests on the aggregate base. ^ Performing laboratory standard Proctor tests on backfill and fill materials. ^ Performing gradation tests on aggregate base. Concrete The concrete testing and monitoring for this project will consist of the following: ^ Performing slump, temperature and air content tests on the plastic concrete prior to placement. ^ Casting 4-inch by 8-inch cylinders for compressive strength testing. ^ Laboratory compressive strength testing of cylinders. Bituminous The bituminous testing and monitoring for this project will consist of the following: ^ Collecting the contractors verification samples. ^ Randomly determining and marking pavement core locations. ^ Observing the contractor coring and core testing. ^ Quality assurance tests that include Rice specific gravity, asphalt content, extracted aggregate gradation, gyratory.gravity, coarse aggregate angularity, fine aggregate angularity and thickness and density of pavement cores. . Reporting and Project Management Test results will be issued for the project as the various tasks are performed. If at any time there are failing tests or we observe construction processes which do not appear to be in accordance with the plans and spec cations or Mn/DOT Schedule of Materials Control, we will notify the engineers representative and any others that we are directed to notify. We will also complete and submit to the project engineer concrete mix design requests and weekly concrete reports for weekly submittal to Mn/DOT. jpJ ~~ City of Richfield Project BL-06-02667D May 2, 2008 Page 3 After the project is completed, we will issue a final report. The report is compiled to meet the requirements for the project audit. The report will include the following: ^ Copies of Certification Cards for Braun Intertec employees conducting testing on this project. ^ A completed Mn/DOT Materials Certification Exceptions Summary form. ^ Completed Grading and Base Report.. ^ Completed IA Report. ^ All Moisture, density, DCP, Proctor and Gradation tests. Concrete mix designs. ^ Weekly concrete reports. ^ Concrete test results. • Bituminous test results. Scheduling Assumptions Based on our understanding of the project and the available project information, we have assumed that the work for this phase of the project will proceed according to the following schedules: • Compaction testing will be performed using sand cone methods, a minimum of 2-3 compaction tests will be conducted each trip. • Bituminous paving will be completed in 7 days. ^ 34 days of concrete placements will be required to complete the project. If the work is completed at different rates than described above, this proposal should be revised. Cost and Invoicing We will furnish the services described herein for an estimated fee of $24,159.50. A tabulation showing our. estimated hourly and/or unit rates associated with our proposed scope of services is also attached. We would be happy to meet with you and discuss our proposed scope of services further, clarifying the various scope components, or discussing how the scope may be adjusted to meet your project requirements. Additional Services and Overtime It is difficult to estimate all of the services, and the quantity of each service, that will be required for any project. Our services are also directly controlled by the schedule and performance of others. For these reasons, our actual hourly or unit quantities, and associated fees, may vary from those reported herein. If the number of hours or units ultimately required exceed those assumed for purposes of this proposal, they will be invoiced at the hourly or unit rates shown in the attached tabulation. If services are ultimately required that have not been identified or described herein, they will be invoiced in accordance with our current Schedule of Charges: Prior to exceeding our estimated fees, however, we will update you • regarding the progress of our work and notify you in the event it appears we will exceed our estimated fees; any fees associated with additional services will be summarized in a Change Order and submitted to you for review and authorization. • _ ~ ~ ~- ~ City of Richfield lU _ Project BL-06-02667D May 2, 2008 Page 4 This proposal was also developed with the understanding that the scope of services defined herein will be required and requested during our normal work hours of 7:00 am to 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Services that we are asked to provide to meet the project requirements or a contractor's construction schedule Q~ ~tsi~e our normal work hours will be invoiced using an overtime rate factor. The factor for services provided outside our normal work hours, or on Saturdays, will be 1.25 times the normal hourly rate for the service provided. The factor for services provided on Sundays or Legal holidays will be 1.5 times the normal hourly rate for the service provided. General Remarks. Braun Intertec appreciates the opportunity to present this Proposal to you. We are providing it in duplicate so the original can be retained for your records and the copy can be signed and returned to us. Please return the copy in its entirety: The proposed fee is based on the scope of services described and the assumptions that our services will be authorized within 30 days and that others will not significantly delay us beyond our proposed schedule. • • b ~ .~ City of Richtteld Project BL-06-02667D • May 2, 2008 Page 5 We include the Braun Intertec General Conditions, which provide additional terms and are a part of our agreement. To have questions answered or schedule a .time to meet and discuss our approach to this project further, please call Matt Balster at 612.369.7066,Josh Van Abel at 952.995.2310 or Matt Ruble at 952.995.2224. Sincerely, BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION Matthew Balster Transportation Project Manager Josh Van Abel, PE Project En ineey ~ ~~~~ Matthew Ruble, PE • ~ Principal Engineer Attachments: Table 1. Estimated Costs General Conditions (6/15/06) The Proposal including the Braun Intertec General Conditions is accepted; and you are authorized to proceed. City of Richfield Authorizer' Fir ;~%~ , ~ Authorizer's S~' ature~ Mic el Eastling Authorizer's Name (please print or type) Richfield Public Works Director Authori'zer's Title • Date Mav ?_9. 2008 Utility and Pavement Proposal :T~~~ ~ity of Richfield Kristen Asher 6700 Portland Avenue S Richfield, MN 55423 Description: ~~ ~p COST ESTIMATE BL-06-02667D 66th St. & Portland Ave Roundabout Service Desc: Construction Testing Services Work Location: 66th St. 8~ Portland Ave Richfield, MN Estimator: Balster, Matthew T Soil Observations 8~ Testing Compaction Testing .- Utilities 10.00 Trips at .3.00 Hours per Trip Roadways 3.00 Trips at 3.00 Hours per Trip DGP's 2.00 Trips at 3.00 Hours per Trip Sample pick-up 6.00 Trips at 2.00 Hours per Trip Moisture content (Astm D 2216) .Sieve analysis through No. 200 Sieve (ASTM C 1 36, D 1140 or C 117) Nuclear moisture-density meter charge, per hour ..Proctor test (ASTM D 698 or ASTM D 1557) Percent crushed (MN/DOT) Trip charge Concrete Observations & Testing Concrete Testing Bollards 2.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours per Trip -Light Bases 7.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours per Trip Sidewalks 6.00 Trips at .2.50 Hours per Trip Curb & Gutter 10.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours per Trip Roadways ~ 9.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours per Trip 6x92" cylinders, if 0.00 Set of 4.00 Cylinders per S required Concrete Cylinder Pick up 8.00 Trips at 1.00 Hour per Trip Compressive strength of 4 x 8" co ncrete cylinders (ASTM C 39), per unit Bollards 2.00 Sets of 3.00 Cylinders per S Light Bases 7.00 Sets of 3.00 Cylinders per S Sidewalks 6.00 Sets of 3.00 Cylinders per S Curb & Gutter 90.00 Sets of 3.00 Cylinders per S Roadways 9.00 Sets of 3.00 Cylinders per S Trip charge Pavement Observations 8: Testing Sample pick-up 7.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours per Trip Marking Cores Observing Contractor 7.00 Trips at 4.00 Hours per Trip Rice specific gravity (ASTM D 2041) Asphalt Content (ASTM D 2172/6307) Quantity: Units 45.00 Hours Unit Price: Extension: 61.00 2,745.00 12.00 Hours 61.00 732.00 10.00 Tests 13.00 130.00 7.00 Tests 100.00 700.00 0.00 Hours 14.50 0.00 6.00 Tests 125.00 750.00 1.00 Test 61.00 61:00 21.00 Trips 25.00 525;00 Phase Total: $5,643.00 85.00 Hours 61.00 5,185.00 8.00 Hours 61.00 488.00 102.00 Tests 18.00 1,836.00 42.00 Trips 25.00 1,050.00 Phase Total: $8,559.00 17.50 Hours 61.00 ..1,067.50 28.00 Hours 78.00 2,184.00 7.00 Tests 61.00 427.00 7.00 Tests 116.00 812.00 Page 1 of 2 ~ ~=~ °~~`-`~ COST ESTIMATE RI _f16-(126g7D fi6~St & Portland Ave Roundabout Pavement Observations & Testing Extracted aggregate gradation (ASTM D 5444) Marshall density testing, triple specimen (AASHTO T245) Gyratory gravity (AASHTO T312) Fine Aggregate Angularity (MnDOT) Percent crushed (MN/DOT) Trip charge Engineering ~ Project Management Project Engineer Transportation Project Manager Sr. Project Engineer Project Assistant SUMMARY Soil Observations 8~ Testing • Concrete Observations & Testing Pavement Observations 8~ Testing Engineering ~ Project Management • 7.00 Tests 77.00 3.00 Tests 95.00 4:00 Tests . 140.00 7.00 Tests 61.00 7.00 Tests 61.00 14.00 Trips 25.00 Phase Total: 5.00 Hours 110.00 20.00 Hours 90.00 1.00 Hour 130.00 7.00 Hours 57.00 Phase Total: 5,643.00 .8,559.00 7,078.50 2,879.00 Total: $24,159.50 539.00 285.00 560.00 427.00 427.00 350.00 $7,078.50 550.00 1,800.00 130.00 399.00 $2,879.00 Page 2 of 2 ,~~-~~ ~, B'RQY N INTERTEC~ December 12,..2008 Ms Kristen Asher City of'Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 5.5423. ~J ~ Red: Construction Testing Services 66th Street and Portland Avenue Roundabout Richfield, Minnesota Dear Ms Asher;. Braun Intedec Corporation Phone:- b51m487.3245 1826Buerkle Rood Fox: 651:487.1812 Saint Poul, MN 55110 Web: brauniMeRec,cam BL-06-02667D This letter provides a general overview of the inspections and testing budget for the Portland Ave. and 66th 6t. roundabout in Richfield Mn. Braun Intertec's'initialeost=estimate for this project wa estimated at $24,159.50. To date, we have exceeded. our estimate by $10,099.67, .bringing the total amount for our services to $34,256.17,. __ In preparing our initial cost estimate and in the absence of a detailed construction schedule, we made nurrlerous assumptions as to how and when the construction would proceed. It was assumed that the contractor would place an average of 70 cubic yards of concrete per placement. Taking this into account ~'' and he fact we mlast adhere to the Minnesota Departmentof Transportation: Schedule of IVlaterials Control we estimated there-would be.approximately. 34 concrete placements, thus requiring us to cast: 34 seis of concrete test cylinders; Todate based on-the contractors_placementsehedule Braun Intertec has cast 61 sets of concrete cylinders to satisfy Mn/Dot Spec: No. 2461 of the Schedule of Material Control. The average cubic yards of concrete placed by the contractor-was 28'.5, far below the estimated 70 cubic yard assumed in our. original estimate.' In addition there were several instances where concrete pours were delayed by the contractor thus increasing the number of hours our technicians were on site... Concrete pours scheduled for Saturdays were a'Iso common in the month of November increasing overtime hours as well - We also understand through conversations with WSB that there is still remaining-concrete work needed to be done for this project. next spring.. An estimated 6 to 9 concrete pours will-be needed to .completely finish the roundabout and urrounding areas. The other area-where the estimated budget was exceeded was in thesoil testing phase. The major', contributor to this was the number of gradations required. The number of-gradations was increased due to the contractor changing imported soil locations. To satisfy Mn/DOT's Spec No._3138 & 3.149 in the Schedule of Materials Control additional gradations and trips'were needed. __ _ _ _ _ The engineering and pavement observation phases of this_project seem to coincide with the initial cost estimate. ~ Cetebrating_50 years of growth through service-.:and trust • ~~'~ We hope ,this letter provides a better understanding of the cost overruns and the additional services needed to bring this project to cczmpletion. If you have further questions please feel free to contact us at 612-369-7066. Sincerely BRAUN 1NTERTEC CORPORATION Matthew Balster Transportation Project Manager • ~~ ~i~ BRAUN /NTERTEC CORPORATION -PROJECT DATA Project Name: 66th St. & Portland Ave Roundabout Location: 66th St. & Portland Ave Richfield, MN Client Project/PO #: Service Description: Construction Testing Services Change Order # 1 -- ....... Braun Intertec Project #: BL-06-02667D Original Contract Date: Kristen Asher Phone: 612-861-9795 City of Richfield Fag: 6700 Portland Avenue S Richfield, MN 55423 ..... ~° ._ CATEGC~ZY OF CHANGES ~ A Change in Site Conditions X Changein.Quantities Additional Services Design Change Change in Time of Completion Other W ESCRIPTIb C ES i" Extra concrete pours and Gradations added to inital cost estimate. __ ~W CI~ALGESTO CONT ;. CZ, 0~ a :..~.,_.:~ Original Price: 23,732.50 Previous Change Orders: 0.00 This Change Order: 10,544.00 New Contract Amount: $34,276.50 Braun lntertec is directed to make the above changes in the contract documents. • Authorizer's Signature: X Date: Print Name: Title: ~ ~ _ ~ , ~ RAllN`._....i~T`E3~T ONT ~ T 1t~F , ; - ~1 Project 1VIanager: Matthew T Balster Phone: (651) 487-3245 1826 Buerkle Road Fag: (651) 487-1812 Saint Paul, MN 55110 -~ Rev. 86/04 . Providing engineering and eztvironmental solutions since 1957 J -~ 1 BRAUN /NTERTEC CORPORATION Change Order # 2 Project Name: .66th St. & Portland Ave Roundabout Braun Intertec Project #: BL-06-02667D Location: 66th St. & Portland Ave Richfield, MN Client Project/PO #: Original Contract Date: Service Description: Construction Testing Services Kristen Asher Phone: 612-861-9795 City of Richfield Faz: 6700 Portland Avenue S Richfield, MN 55423 t x CATEGORYOF C . NOES ~ Change in Site Conditions Change in Quantities Additional Services Design Change X Change in Time of Completion Other _~ DESCfKIr'l li Q~ CAGES ~ # ~ ~. _.~: ' Concrete Pour change order estimate to complete 66th and Portland Ave. Roundabout • _.~ _CHANGES PTO CONT~A,C tU ~ Original Price: 23,732:50 Previous Change Orders: 10,544.00 This Change Order: 3,551.50 New Contract Amount: $37,828.00 Braun Intertec is directed to make the above changes in the contracf documents. Authorizer's Signature: X Date: Print Name: Title: Y ~ ~ ~ ~ B RA ll t~INwTE12'1`EC ~ O~TA C _ _ Ti - ~ Project Manager: Matthew T Balster 1826 Buerkle Road Saint Paul, MN 55110 Phone: (651) 487-3245 Faz: (651)487-1812 Rev. 8/6/04 • Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # ~g REPORT # ~ ~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JaNUaRY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: KRISTIN ASxER, CITY ENGINEER NAE-tE, TITLE r~ a~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: • Consideration of ratification of a supplemental agreement with Shafer Contracting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Ratify Supplemental Agreement No. 3 (SA#3~ as approved by staff. ~~ ~ ~, II. BACKGROUND As construction of the 66th Street and Portland Avenue Intersection has progressed, the construction. manager, site observer, engineers, contractors and City staff have been in constant communication reviewing the progress and making changes when necessary. The supplemental agreement before the Council for consideration was approved by staff prior to receiving Council approval to keep the construction progressing without delays. The supplemental agreement is recommended for ratification as approved by staff because the contractor encountered contaminated material that was not detected in the environmental documents prior to bid. This material needed to be disposed of at a qualified landfill and the plans did not have a bid item for disposing of-this material, adding an additional cost of $35,239.82. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY 0113PortlandSA • All supplemental agreements over $25,000 need Council- approval. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • These decisions were made as construction progressed and final costs were not available until work was complete. C. FINANCIAL • The total construction budget (bid amount) approved by the Council on January 22, 2008 for the. intersection project is $2,449,351.74. • The $35,239.82 for SA#3 will be funded using 80% Federal funds and. 20% Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds. D. LEGAL • Staff is adhering to the Federal and State Aid approved procedures when processing .the change orders. • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The stockpiling, testing, and disposing of the contaminated material at the intersection was conducted in accordance with MPCA approved methods. • IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ l • Council may choose not to ratify the staff approved supplemental agreement and work orders at this time, however the work has been completed and the contractor is expecting payment for these items V. ATTACHMENTS • Supplemental Agreement No. 3 VI. PRINCII'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • F ; _. ~ (~ K- I STATE AID FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION May 2008 . SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 1 of 2 City/County of Richfield Supplemental Agreement No. 3 FEDERAL PROJECT N0. STATE PROJECT NO. LOCAL PROJECT NO. CONTRACT NO. STPX 2706 (140) 157-020-19 CP 41450 2745 CONTRACTOR NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Shafer Contracting, inc. PO Box 128 Shafer MN 55074 LOCATION OF WORK: TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT AMOUNT Richfield, MN $35,239.82 This Contract is between the Local Government Entity and Contractor as follows: WHEREAS: This contract provides for, among other things, Grading, Surfacing, Concrete Curb and Gutter, Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Water Main and Signing, and WHEREAS: The Contractor encountered contaminated material that was not detected in the environmental documents prior to bid. This material needed to be disposed of at a qualified landfill and, WHEREAS: The plans did not call for nor have bid item for disposing of this material and, WHEREAS: The plans did include a bid item and unit price for subgrade excavation, • which will be used for the stockpiled material and, ' NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT: 1. The contractor shall provide all materials, labor, equipment, traffic control, and mobilization and dispose of the contaminated material. 2. The work of this supplemental agreement wil! be in accordance with the pertinent portions of the plan, the special provisions, the Mn/DOT Standard Specifications, Mn/DOT Standard Plates, and as directed by the Engineer. 3. Contract time wiil not be revised except as provided under the Contract Provisions of Mn/DOT Specification 1806. 4. The Contractor shall not make claim of any kind or character whatsoever for any cost or expenses which they may have incurred or which they may hereafter incur in performing the work and furnishing the materials required by Phis Agreement. COST BREAKDOWN Group/*Fund Item No. Description Unit Unit Price Quantity Amount Cat. Increased Items ~ Group 1 I 2105.507 I subgrade Excavation ~ Cu Yd ~ $7.25 ~ 1,408 $10,208.00 $10,208.00 Subtotal Group 1 Increased Items • „ Y. r • W ~~ STATE AID FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION May 2x08 SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT Page 2 of 2 Negotiated Items Group '{ 2104.601 Haul & Dispose of Contaminated Lump $25,031.82 1 $25,031.82 Material -Special 4 Sum Subtotal Group 1 Negotiated Items (Including Prime Markup) $25,031.82 ~ GRAND TOTAL $35,239.82 { '`Group/Funding category is required for federal projects. Approved by Apprc Project Contr Engineer: Print Name: J~e~~. ~~ Print / ~ ~ ~' Date: `z~~l V g Phone: 36 0 l~ 6 Date: ~d by ~ n tor: ~-O~-Y ~y,~ ~o.S t~ ! ~.1~ D g Phone: Z ~ 1- S'a lq Original to Project Engineer; Copy to Contractor • Once contract has been fully executed, forward a copy to DSAE for funding review: The State of Minnesota is not a participant in this contract; signing by the District State Aid Engineer is for FUNDING PURPOSES ONLY. Reviewed for compliance with State and Federal Aid RuieslPolicy. Eligibility does not guarantee funds will be available. This project is eligible for: ~. Federal Funding .ZC State Aid Funding _~Local funds r District State Aid Engineer: ~~ .---~~ ~Z ____ Date: ~~~~-~~J ~b • AGENDA SECTION: • AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: KRISTIN ASxER, CITY ENGINEER DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NAME, TITLE CONSENT 6L 12 ~~ _ - SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: ~ Consideration of a proposal for additional work from WSB & Associates for the construction inspection of the 6300 Block of Lyndale Reconstruction Project. ,~ ~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve an additional $11,300 for additional work by WSB & Associates to provide construction inspection services for the 6300 Block of Lyndale Reconstruction Project. -~ II. BACKGROUND J During the 2008 construction season, the City administered the reconstruction of the 6300 block of Lyndale on behalf of Mn/DOT. The project along Lyndale Avenue included a new storm water pipe to convey additional runoff from the Crosstown Project to Richfield Lake. The project is .currently substantially complete with some minor street light work to be finished in January and then project close out. The City has received funds from the State to cover the State's portion of the project, including all of the State's associated construction inspection and contract administration. MSA (gas tax) and utility funds will fund the City's portion for costs associated with sanitary, water and lighting utilities included in the construction. WSB and Associates had prior approval for construction engineering services up to the amount Mn/DOT was willing to pay. At the City's request there were changes 0113WSB made to the plan that included. additional work at the intersection of 63~d Street and • Lyndale Avenue in this contract, limiting the total time disruption to the area residents at the intersection. These changes resulted in additional construction engineering costs. WSB is requesting $11,300 in .additional funds to cover extended contract time and the upcoming close out. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council must approve all change order or additions to the project costs. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The additional construction engineering services are. necessary to - ensure that the construction project. is completed according to plan and close out is completed in a timely manner. C. FINANCIAL I • The estimated additional cost for construction engineering services is $11,300 to be paid for using Municipal State Aid Funds (Gas Tax). • D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS J • The proposal is for additional professional services that will not produce any environmental impacts. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The Council may choose not to approve the additional work at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS • WSB letter requesting more funds. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None anticipated. • WSB ~ Aso- January 5, 2008 C~ L ~ ~ Infrastructure ^ Engineering ^ Planning ^. Construction Kristin Asher, PE City of Richfield Public Works 6700 Portland Avenue S. Richfield, MN 55423 Re: Additional Construction Services 6300 Block Lyndale Avenue Construction Services S.P. 2782-302 S.A.P.157-363-027 C.P. 414-70 City of Richfield, MN WSB Project No. 1725-02 Dear Ms. Asher: 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 We hereby request a change order for additional fees related to the construction of the 6300 Block of Lyndale Avenue for the City. These additional fees are a result of the extension of the construction services beyond the 65 working days on which the original agreement with the City was based. An additional 10 days were added to the construction working schedule. due to construction plan changes in the intersection of 63rd Street and Lyndale Avenue and slower construction due to adverse weather conditions in late October and early November. Upon this time, additional costs for construction inspection and surveying were incurred by WSB and Associates in the amount of $9800. A request is also made at this time for a contingency of $1,500 to cover unforeseen events that may occur as WSB and Associates and the City work with the contractor to closeout the project. The total requested amount with contingency is $11,300. As always, we only bill for hours spent on the project, so if the work I am anticipating is not necessary, the City will not be billed. Remaining tasks for WSB to complete services for the City include processing two pay vouchers, holding a meeting with the City and the contractor to negotiate fmal payment to the contractor, executing project closeout/punch list items, producing record drawings, and coordination and inspection of the installation of lighting in January and final landscape items in March or April. Should you have any further questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, Inc. • Rick Hauser, PE Project Manager ACEC 2008 Firm of the Year Minneapolis ^ St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer C:\DOCaIDeats ~d SettiagslDAndexsoa\Local Seaings\Temporary Iate+aet Files\OLK69\Addiuoaal Services (2).doc AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # C)M REPORT # 13 STAr~r~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~ ~ v~ SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: _ ~..~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an Amendment to a work-order to have WSB & Associates to continue providing Construction Engineering Services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge over I-494 Project. ~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a $20,000 amendment to an existing work order to have WSB & Associates to continue providing Construction Engineering Services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project ~..~ II. BACKGROUND On November 10, 2008 Council approved a $20,000 work order to hire WSB & Associates to begin to perform construction engineering services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project. WSB & Associates is the firm that designed the Lyndale Avenue Bridge. They are in the best position to interpret the plans for the construction contractor and the Minnesota Department of Transportation staff. The consultant can also provide technical expertise in the event changes to the plans need to be made based on unanticipated conditions encountered in the field. WSB estimated that it would cost $162,000 to provide construction engineering services for the entire construction period of the Lyndale Bridge. The additional $20,000 in Municipal State Aid funds is needed until City staff completes advertising for consultant services before the City can begin using federal funds to pay for these services. 0113Lyndale Bridge Construct Engrg ~ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Replacement of the Lyndale 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 quickly and accurately in order to assure that project stays on schedule. C.. FINANCIAL 1 • 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. • The City has already spent $20,000 on construction engineering services on the Lyndale Bridge Project since October 2008. City staff is working to secure federal highway funds to pay for most of the $162,000 needed to perform construction engineering on the bridge .project. The City must advertise for a consultant before it can obtain federal funds. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has directed City staff to obtain Council approval for this amended work order. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • The Lyndale Bridge Project has already received all required state and federal environmental approvals. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ J • Council can choose to reject the amendment to the WSB Work Order to provide additional construction engineering services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge. However, City staff is not equipped to provide the kind of special services needed to oversee bridge construction. V. ATTACHMENTS • WSB & Associates Proposal for Construction Engineering Services on the Lyndale Avenue Bridge Project • Lyndale Avenue Bridge Over I-494 Layout VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None Anticipated gym- I • SCOPE OF SERVICES WORK PLAN SCHEDULE The following Scope of Services outlines in greater detail the tasks required to fulfill the objectives of the Project. Table 1 provides a summary by task of the estimated hours for each task. TASK 1.0: PROJECT MANAGEMENT Description: Maintain project control through internal team meetings, team meetings with City staff, and through other forms of communication. Subtasks: • Schedule meetings of Project Team, Mn/DOT, the City of Bloomington, and the City of Richfield staff. • Identify roles of key personnel and establish communication procedures. • Establish need and frequency of ongoing Project Team meetings/reviews. Participate in meetings and document meeting minutes. • Monitor progress and manage WSB staff and subconsultants. - • Prepare and submit monthly status reports on project progress. • Respond to requests for attendance at City-initiated meetings to discuss project. • Implement and oversee quality control plan. • Establish project file control system and distribute to project team. ' • • Monitor project budget and work progress. • Prepare subconsultant contracts. Deliverables: Project Budgeting, Progress Reports -Memoranda, Work Orders and Subcontracts, Quality Control Plan. TASK 2.0: CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION Description: Visit the construction site once per week to attend construction meetings, monitor the construction progress; meet with Mn/DOT construction staff and identify potential issues. Subtasks: • The project manger shall attend the weekly construction meetings and monitor the construction progress and consistency with the plans. The time commitment for this task shall be 8 hours per week for the duration of the project. Scope of Services Page 1 October 31, 2008 ~m-~ • • The bridge engineer shall attend the weekly construction meetings and monitor the construction progress and consistency with the plans. The time commitment for this task shall be 8 hours per week during active bridge construction. Deliverables: None TASK 3.0: OFFICE ENGINEERING Description: Provide plan interpretation, shop drawing review, RFI processing and Mn/DOT requested design calculations. Subtasks: • Provide plan interpretation to Mn/DOT and the contractor. • .Review shop drawing submittals. • Process RFI's that are submitted by the contractor and/or Mn/DOT. • Provide design calculations requested by Mn/DOT to aid in the bridge construction, Deliverables: As Needed per subtask TASK 4.0: AGGREEMENT PROCESSING Description: Provide coordination with the utility companies and the RR and provide the city with agreement documents which are complete and ready for council consideration. Deliverables: Agreements with Comcast, Qwest, Xcel & Progressive Rail TASK 5.0: LOCAL BUSINESS COORDINATION. Description: Conduct meetings with local business on an as-needed basis. The goal of this task is to keep the local businesses current with the construction schedule and how it affects their business. It is anticipated that an initial kick-off meeting with each business will be held along with bi-monthly meetings as the construction progresses. Su~btasks: • Schedule and attend meetings with local businesses. • Provide~meeting minutes. from each meeting. . • Provide assistance to .business owners on construction related concerns. • Develop- one staging brochure for public use. ' Deliverables: Meeting minutes from each business meeting. Staging Brochure. • Scope of Services Page 2 October 31, 2008 • ~~~ PARTICIPATION OF RICIiFIELD The lists below describes the responsibilities of the City: CITY OF RICtir tr:LD • Provide City Contact-Project Manager. • Have Regular Discussions with Consultant Project Manager. • Keep Consultant AYr~aised of Issues and Concerns of City and Others. • Review and Pay Invoices. • Process the contract documents (Change Orders, Pay Vouchers, etc.) submitted by the contractor. • Scope of Services Page 3 October 31, 2008 • ~~/~~+ Yf~~--''~.-~ gas T1NAL DESSGN ~,,....- Task No. ~e rs ription ~ _ _ 1 pR0)ECT MANAGEMENT __._-- 2 cONS•rxuCTloN OBSEi~v___ ATI- ~" g OFFICE ENGINEERING 4 AGREEMENT FROCESSIN` L5 flCAL B~ COORDINAT__ 101 - r..*ol llOnra nd t 12~ "'..~.~*~"".. + Overltcx±d -- n1.12.5 % _ ..._.mt _ -. • Table 1 Estimate of Total ~Oexvices Y,yndale.Ave Construction S RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA -Total Estimated VVSB hours Total ,,,,-;.. ~ Hours Sr. Cmtstzuction Clerical lns ector Cadd'rech $ Sr. En 'Weer En ineet ~52 Manager -,_,~~-- r 47G_ 192 24 !--~----~ 58 gb .__ ~` 310 120 24 102 50 I1- 200 _---- 8 _---~--^--._. ~_ 1. ~ - _~~I__---- -- l 12G8 s _ _ _ 90 _ 4 31Z 24 174 G50 .. ..$19.00 76 $51.25 $26.00 g608A0 X40.00 _. ~ ..nn nn $624.00 ~-----'' 17,835.961 07_--~--`='_" 4,552.y~~ 1,55a.vo 7,403.18 ,,,,.,. 1599.09 2,229.49, ~~- 40,976.57 20,065.451 GG 628.58 '.- ~-- ~_ $1,000 00 ~72 $11,697.50 $20,224.22 `~' ~~~ This is tUe total project coat estimate and iucludes'1't~A gnu emu......-- PI ~ I ~ CE j;1 ~' C i ;'J- to .__ ~ ~ ~~I I ' loi t ? bg1t. ~~~~-~-- r_~~~ ~ .(i~~s~.,.~ ~1~ ii I~ ~` rz ~f ~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~~.. ~ I) ~ ~ ~ + ~ §~ '~ • ~ Il~r ~~ ~. ICI ~ E. '~ , ~~W~ fJl ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~.1 _ _Ly,~ ~~l~L I~ I I = ! ' ~y 11 ~ J {~ C L ~ ~~t LL ~L C_ 11 J I ~~-~ f'P .LI ~ 1 ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ W 11 ; G' , ~~rY _ _ i I ~_; - _ 1-, ~ .11 ~ I ~. __ .~ 3 S~ ° ~ I I 4 r ~ ~ ~ ~ i I fj ~ ~ I ~~ ?' s ~ I ~ ~~~~ ~ k ~ ~ mw ~- ; c~`I ~ ~ ,r. j~ \li I -i I-~ 11 ~1 i.+I~^ ~ _ /~ _.. IlJ ~- A ~ I. r. j. I~`i K ' v ~. -- - 9e I - ~i 1 I ~~ - - - ,x EAEa i I ~ I `. .1- ~ ~ I ~ `may ~ ~~ffi~= _ 13'b I ^~~ ~ `~ 'Ii g II ~1~ ~ W ~ ~, j~s~ ! ~ ~ ~ I 1 ~ ~ . j o 1' a tl 1r» I '` i. 3-~ I.~I~ ~~~- ~~ sa ~ O~~~a ~ "fie' ~l~j U ~. #~ i s a i a ~ e ~ ~..~ ~~ ~ *2 a t~ t I I', l i~'.e ~° o --_ -x-! AI a i' L ~ ~-- II _ ~ x 1 ~ ~._ 7 ~ ....,._ b s~I ~ 11~ ~~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~~ Q L ~tFiJ ~ l ~- b \ i `ti ~ ~. . . _ - -.. ~L [ • U ~G .. M! - . - ~ 1 _.. - --. ~ '1 - ~ -..r. - -- \ s ~, C 1 t a 111 ~~ ~ ~ e~ :~ , ~ > F~ ~,' / ~ ' ~ F wuwa'n a _ ~ ~ /~, 7 I ~~ a V,E , w _ CS . ~ ~ a w- ; ~ ~-' ~ tia fa-rW`1~1 ~ e-,L ~~ I a .-I )t~ W ' to I ~a w / < .. ~ i ~ ..~_ ~ 1 f ` -m.. ~. - i ~ ~ Y ° Fes' ` = " ~ - _ ~ d~`~J '1 , I ~_" _ f; ~ ~I ~ ~- __ I r _ .. l~J t-1 l,r ~ ~rr ~ ° ~ I __ ,~ ~~ 1 ~ ~~ I IJ b fj ~,' 1 I ° w I I ~i~ 7 j ~ r' 1 ~, I ~ - x I ° ~ c~ I I I ~~ r 1-r-L ~ n -~I I ~~ ~~ b t~ ~a ~I i o ~ ~ ~~ I ~ I ~ I `~ ~ ~i ~~ ~ ~I `` 1 u i ;1 I. S . a__ I ! ` ~I~ ~O 9~ . ~ ~: ;~ 11 jl xi ~ xi ` J~ jl - ~ I ~~ ~7 ~ 1 '~ pI I ~~ *~ ~ ~~o '~: ~ - _ _ ~~ Id 9 111 ;1 = l ~ I ~ a II 1 ~ ~ ° I ~ ~ ~ W Q~-~~~'-~~~' b~i~t~'2a.--p~.--~-~ ISZ S"_.~ u V - I AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTION AGENDA ITEM # $ REPORT # 14 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a Resolution receiving a Preliminary Report and setting a Public Hearing for the 2009 Alley Paving Project. _~ ,~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: • Adopt the attached resolution receiving the 2009 Alley Paving Project Preliminary Report • Schedule a Public Hearing for February 24, 2009 J~ II. BACKGROUND In 1981, the City Council established a policy providing for the improvement of the City's alleys by concrete paving upon the receipt of petitions. On April 28, 1986, the City Council held a special study session to review alternative alley paving policies: It was the consensus of the Council to support the alternative which recommended paving all remaining alleys without submittal of .petitions. At the time, it was also recommended that alleys with questionable futures (alleys that fell within project areas) be excluded from the final paving project until plans for adjacent projects were finalized. The projects under consideration at the time included the 1-35W/Crosstown Reconstruction, Lyndale-Hub-Nicollet Redevelopment, and Cedar Avenue.. Due to the construction of the Cedar Point Commons, City Bella, and the I-35W/Crosstown project, the future of the alleys in question is now known. 0113A11ey . KRISTIN ASxER, CITY ENGINEER Today there are five (5) alleys in north Richfield adjacent to I-35W that are yet to be paved. The 64th Street & Girard Alley Storm Water project, scheduled to be ..constructed in 2009, will trigger the paving on one of the five alleys and staff is recommending that the Council move forward to have the remaining alleys paved. On July 22, 2008, the City Council ordered the preparation of a preliminary report for the 2009 Alley Paving Project. It has been City policy to assess the adjacent property owners for the cost of the alley paving. Since the alleys are abutting public property (1-35W) the City will be responsible for covering half the cost of the alley project. A public meeting is scheduled for affected residents on Monday, January 26, 2009 (from 6:00 - 8:00 p.m.) at the Wood Lake Nature Center. The attached notices will be mailed on January 14, 2009 following the adoption of the resolution ordering the public hearing. ~ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is City policy to pave all alleys with concrete. • It is City policy to assess the adjacent property owner for the cost of the alley paving. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • In 2009, the 64"' & Girard Storm Water Project will include alley • paving, staff recommends completing all remaining alleys as part of one single project. C. FINANCIAL • The estimated cost of the improvements is $213,180 • It is anticipated that 50% of the cost will be assessed to adjacent property owners and 50% is budgeted to come from a capital project fund. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to an_ saver questions. • Staff is following the Minn. Statute 429 (local improvements) process for the assessment. E.. ENVIlZONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Paving the alleys will reduce the amount of erosion and alley degradation runoff into the storm water system. IV. AL r~xNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The Council can choose not to order the preliminary report at this time. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution Receiving Preliminary Report and Calling Public Hearing • Preliminary Report • Project Map • Public Meeting Notice VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • N/A ~-l RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECEIVING PRELIMINARY REPORT AND CALLING PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED 2009 ALLEY PAVING PROJECT- WHEREAS, pursuant to direction of the City Council at the July 22, 2008 regular meeting, with reference to the improvement of the following alleys by concrete paving: .Alley between 35W and Emerson Ave. 35W and Emerson Ave. 35W and Girard Ave. 35W and Girard Ave. 35W and Girard Ave.- From 65th St. 65th St. 65th St. 65th St. 64th St. To 390' S of 65th St. 64th St. 455' S of 65th St. 64th St. 63rd St. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The preliminary report on the proposed 2009 Alley Paving Project dated the 31St day of December, 2008,- prepared by the city engineer, is hereby received and ordered to be placed on file. 2. A public hearing on said proposed improvement is hereby called to be held on • February 24, 2009, commencing at 7 p.m. in the council chambers of City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota, at which time the council will consider the improvement of these alleys in accordance with the report and assessment of abutting property owners#or approximately half of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 429, at an estimated cost of the improvement of $213,180. 3.The city clerk is hereby authorized and directed to give published and mailed notice of such hearing in the manner required by law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City .Clerk s ~/ Preliminary Report and Estimate of Cost . Alley Paving & Appurtenant Work City of Richfield, Minnesota I: Tvoe of Work Concrete alley paving improvements in the City of Richfield, Minnesota. II. Reason for Improvement Alleys identified in Item IV are proposed as a paving program for the City of Richfield to provide concrete alley surfacing to benefit abutting properties and . traveling public. Petitions were not received for proposed improvement. In 1986 it was the consensus of the Council to pave all remaining .unpaved alleys without submittal of petitions. III. Date of Preliminary Report December 31, 2008 • IV. Location Alley between From To - 1. 35W and Emerson Ave. 65th St. 390' S of 65th St. 2. 35W and Emerson Ave. 65th St. 64th St. 3. 35W and Girard Ave. 65th St. 455' S of 65th St. 4. 35W and Girard Ave.. 65th St. .64th St: 5. 35W and Girard_ Ave. 64th St. 63rd St. V. Feasibility . The alley paving project is feasible and can best be accomplished in conjunction with the 64~' Street and Girard Alle y stormwater project. VI. Property to be assessed - - All that property abutting the alleys previously described in Item No. IV. VII. Estimated Proiect Cost 11' Wide Concrete Alley Estimated Construction -Cost Administration, Legal, Engineering • and interest (35%) Cost of alleys 1 thru 5 $157,911 $ 55,269 ~3 • • Estimated Project Cost $213,180. Vlll. Estimated Proiect Assessment Property abutting alleys will be assessed for alley construction according to the assessment policy established in the City Council Resolution No. 6345. Allevs 1 thru 5 Total Assessable Alley Frontage 2,612' Total Project Cost $213,180 Less City Cost (50%} $106.590 *budgeted in 2009 CIB Assessable: Cost $106,590 $106,590 / 2,612' _ $40.81 /.assessable foot Typical Assessment for 50' lot = $2,040 Typical Assessment for 75' lot = $3,060 f hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and fihat 1 am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws or the State of Minnesota. Kristin Asher Reg. No. 42679 Date: fI1~~~ ' ~ Po OSEp ALLEY 2~~ppVING PR~JEC ,~-' 63rd S~rget g4th Street_ 65th Strget _----~ :,,; ;~ ,~~,;, :___- - 1,260 Feet . 630 - 315 0 N E ~: S ~8gend Assessed parcels pulleys ~ .-~ proposed CITY OF RICHFIELD , Meeting Notice ou are invited taattend a formal meeting to discuss a proposed concrete alley paving project#or 2009. The ~ity Council has directed staff to move forward with a 2009 Alley Paving Project to complete the paving on all unpavetl,alleys in Richfield. It has been City.policy to assess the adjacent"property owners,for the cost of he alley paving. Since the alleys are abutting public property (I-35W) the City will be responsible for. covering half of the cost of the alley project. .The estimated project assessment is $41 /assessable. #oot of property. The typical assessment for. a 50' lot _ $2050 and #or a 75' lot =:$3075. -REGARDING: 2009 Alley Paving Project WHEN: Monday, January:-26, 2008 6:00 to 7:30 p:m.' WHERE: Wood Lake Nature Center Conference Room 735 Lake -Shore. Drive ; Richfield MN 55423 QUESTIONS: Contact the City's Engineering Department 612-861-9795 AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HdURS IN ADVANCE TO-THE CITY CLERK AT 612-861-9738. AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # 9 REPORT # 15 ~~ STArr~ REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHEgYL KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COORDINATOR - -- --" NAM ~{T'ITLE REVIEWED BY CITY t/r"' ; MANAGER: ~,j~Q. ., ....~ ', ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the designation of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2009. -;~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By .Motion: City Council designation of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2009. _ -~ ~~ II. BACKGROUND It is necessary to designate a City Council Member to serve as the Mayor Pro Tempore for those times when the Mayor is absent from the City. City Council Member Susan Rosenberg served as Mayor Pro Tempore for 2008. ~ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY ~ • Each year the City Council designates a Council Member to serve as the Mayor Pro Tempore. B. CRITICAL ISSUES ~ • It is necessary to designate a Mayor Pro Tempore to ensure continuation of City operations during an absence of the Mayor. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Defer the designation to a future Council meeting. V. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. 0108MayorProTempore • • AGENDA SECTION OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # 1 O REPORT # 16 J REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COORDINATOR ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Discussion regarding Council attendance at 2009 National League of Cities Conferences and N.O.I.S.E. Conference. .~;, I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Designate Council Member(s) to attend the March 2009 National League of Cities (NLC) Congressional Conference; July 2009 N.O.I.S.E. Conference; and the November 2009 NLC Congress of Cities Conference. II. BACKGROUND In 2003, the City Council decided that attendance at conferences should be rotated among the Council Members, so this item is placed on the agenda for the Council consideration of the attendance for the three conferences in 2009. These conferences become especially important as federal policy issues affecting a wide variety of local government concerns could be on the congressional agenda. • According to State Statute 471.66, the governing body of cities and school districts must adopt a policy that controls out-of--state travel for elected officials. That policy was adopted by the City Council in November 2005 and stipulates that the City Council musf approve, in advance by a motion, attendance at out-of-state conferences. The general guidelines for evaluating out-of-state travel opportunities are listed in the policy. Knowing which Council Member(s) will. be attending each of the conferences will assist staff with early registration and airline schedules. STAFF .REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING .TANUaRY 13, 2009 0113conferences • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The Council has determined that attendance at the NLC and N.O.I.S.E. Conferences is beneficial to the City's operations and long- range planning efforts. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • While the City continues to face revenue reductions from the State, it is even more critical that the Council remains in the informational loop regarding congressional activities as it relates to airport/aviation activities, federal funds and homeland security issues. C. FINANCIAL • The NLC Conferences are budgeted in the City's 2009 budget. The N.O.I.S.E. Conference is budgeted in the HRA 2009 budget. • The estimated total cost of each conference, including registration, flight, lodging and per diem, is $2500 per Council Member. However, the City Council may wish to take into consideration the severe financial constraints facing the City for 2009. • D. LEGAL • According to State Statute 471.66, the governing body of cities and school districts must adopt a policy that controls out-of-state travel for elected officials. IV. AL1~:xNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Address this issue prior to each conference. • Decline to send Council delegates to any or only designated conferences. V. ATTACHMENT (S~ • List of conferences. • Information related to March 2009 NLC conference VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. • i~-l • • COUNCIL MEMBER ATTENDANCE AT NATIONAL CONFERENCES 2006 - 2009 CONFERENCE DATE ~ 2006 NLC March 11-15 Congressional City ~ NOISE September 27-29 NLC December 5-9 Congress of Cities ~ 2007 NLC March 10-14 Congressional City ~ NOISE July 18-20 NLC November 13-17 Congress of Cities ~ ~ 2008 NLC March 8-12 Congressional City ~ NOISE July 16-18 NLC Congress November 11-15 of Cities ~ ~ 2009 NLC March 14-18 Congressional City ~ NOISE I TBD (typically July) NLC Congress November 10-14 of Cities LOCATION ATTENDEES Washington, DC Kirsch San Francisco, CA Kilian Reno, NV Sandahl Washington, DC Goettel Devich Atlanta, GA None New Orleans, LA Sandahl ~ ~ Washington, DC Goettel Dulles, VA ~ None Orlando, FL .None ~ ~ Washington, DC ~ TBD ~ San Antonio, TX O 1 /02/09 V ~./ r NLC Congressional City Conference Registration and Housing Form Mamott Wardman Park- Washington, DC -March l4 -18, 2009 -Advance Registration Deadline: February 2, 2009 For faster Registration and Housing Reservation, Register Online of www.NLCCorraressionalCitvConference,oro No housing orr_,:,;.,..an will he processed without accompanying paymentin hdL Hotel Reservations: You must be registered to reserve a hotel room. To guarantee your room, all hotels require one nights deposit plus 14.5%tax, per room 21 days prior to your ardval. This is required even if Are you a newly elected official? Size of city? you plan to ardve before 6:00 p.m. If arcommodations are not guaranteed 21 days in advance, the Name Sex reservation will be cancelled. Title City/Organization Mailing Address Citv Phone Email [] Please make my hotel reservation as indicated below. [a I do not require hotel accommodations at any of the hotels listed below. Ga Please contact me regarding suite information. State Zip Room Dates: Arrival Date: _/_/ Departure Date: _/_I_ Some hotels charge an early departure fee. Please confirm your arrival and departure dates Fax are correct on NLC Meefing Services and Hotel cordirmations. Confirmation Format-HTML: ^ YES ^ NO Spouse/Partner Name* ($35 feel *Spouse/Partnernot eligiblefor aseparate hote/room Child Name (14 and under, no fee) Youth Delegate'* (15-18, $100 fee) Age_ Age_ Local officials are encouraged to register youth as active perticipantsin this cronkrence to contribute to NLC's youth agenda. I/!he youth delegate requires hotel accommodations sepa~ate from yours, attach the registration fwm with yow compktedlorm. Youth Chaperone Name ($100 fee) Conference Registration Fees (Postmarked by February 2, 2009) 5 $360 First Time Attendee $ 1 $430 NLC Member City (On-site rate is $480 after 2/2109) $ 2 $430 Associate Member (On-site rate is $480 after 2I7J09) $ 3 $550 SML Member City (On-site rate is $610after 2/2109) $ 4 $655 Non-Memf~er/Other (On-site rate is $700 after212/09) $ To be eligible for the advanced registration fees registration forms must be postmarked by February 2, 20(19. To avoid lines onsife then registration forms must be received by March 9, 2009. Specialty Registration Rates SG $35 Spouse/Partner(non-refundable) 7 $100 Youth Delegate 8 $100 Youth Chaperone (not applicable to elected officials) 22 $175 Students Leadership Training Institute Seminars You must be registered for the Lronference in order to attend Saturday, March 14t^, Full Day Seminars L01 $175 Who Said Hidng a City Managerwould be Easy? $ L02 $175 .Why Resilient Leaders Succeed Where Other Fail $ Saturday, March 14'^, Half Day Seminars L03 $115 Building Community Partner Connections and Measudng your Success $ L04 $115 Leadership That Matters: Effective Practices for Local Officials $ L05 $115 Community Change and the New Economy: A Best Practice Approach $ LO6 $115 The Rogue Council Member $ L07 $115 Sustainability $ LOB $115 The Dynamics of Cdtical Conversations $ Sunday, March 15a', Full Day Seminars L09 $175 Practical Strategic Planning for Local Government $ Sunday, March 15"', Half Day Seminars L10 $115 Building Capacity for Financial Success: Beyond the Balance Sheet $ L11 $115 Public Sector Leadership: Stewards of the Common Good $ L12 $115 Effective Media Interviews $ L13 $115 Getting from Conflict to Confrontation to Resolution $ L14 $115 Transforming to a'Sustainabie City' . $ L15 $115 Enhancing Council Effectiveness: Manage Cgnflicts and Differences Constructively $ L16 $115 Speak So They Will Listen $ L17 $115 Leading in Turbulent Times: How Local City Officials can Thdve in Chaos $ Special Events Pt $35 Celebrate Diversity Breakfast L18 $40 Leadership Luncheon Constituency Group Events You must be registered for the conference in order to attend. Al $45 APAMO Activity Fee G1 $45 GLBLO Activity Fee H1 $55 HELD Activity Fee N1 $140 NBGLEOActivity Fee W1 $50 WIMG Luncheon Total Registration Fee: Room Type La Single (1 person/1 bed) [_] Smoking Preference: Ca Double (2 people/1 bed) G ] Non-Smoking (_] DoublelDouWe (2 people/2 beds) [] Triple (3 peoplel2 beds) [-] Quad (4 people/2 beds) Hotels attempt to provide room type preference but it is not guaranteed. Marriott Wardman is a 100% smoke-free hotel! Sharing My Room With: (This is for hotel rate and check-in purposes.): 11 : 2) 31 Special Housing Request (e.g., wheelchair accessible rooms, etc.): If you have special housing or transportation needs, please contact NLC Meeting Services. Hotel Choices: Indicate your first-choice hotel with the number "1". Marriott Wardman Park is the Headquarter Hotel. Room Rate Type SgI1DblfrrtplQuad Marriott Wardman Park Standard $2491$269/$289/$309 Omni Shoreham Standard $229/$229/$229/$229 Hotel Deposit: All major credk cards with expiration date of 03/09 or later are accepted at the conference hotels. All checks, government purchase orders, vouchers or claims must be submitted to the hotel after January 19"' but before February 13" and are subject to approval. Please include your 6 digit REG ID # indicated on the NLC Meeting Services confirmation. Registration Fee Payment Information: [You must check one of the options below.] (~ Charge my REGISTRATION FEES to VISA, MasterCard or AMEX listed below [] Check for REGISTRATION FEES made payable to National League of Cities [ ] Purchase Order for REGISTRATION FEES -copy must be enclosed 8 payment must be received by February 2, 2009. Hotel Deposit Payment Information: [You must check one of the options below.] (~ Charge my HOTEL DEPOSIT to the credit card listed below L.] Check for HOTEL DEPOSIT -please submit to hotel address noted on confirmation after January 19, 2009 and before February 13, 2009 -subject to hotel approval Credit Card Authodzaton: NLC Meeting Services is authorized to use the card below to pay all applicable registration fees and guarantee my hotel reservation. I understand that one night's room charge plus tax will be billed through this card if I fail to show up for my assigned housing on the confirmed date, unless I have cancelled my reservation with the hotel at least 72 hours in advance. l also understand some hotels will process the credit card for one night's deposit immediately upon receiving reservation information from NLC Meeting Services. VisalMC/AMEX #: Exp. Date Card Holder Name Card Holder Signature Additional Credit Card Authorization: For hotel deposit only if different than the credtt card number listed above. (Expiration date must be 03179 orlater, per hotel requirement.) VisaIMCIAMEX# Exp. Date Card Holder Name CaM Holder Signature Registration Cancellatan Poliey: NI requests must be received n writing, posbnarked by February Z 2009, and are subject to a $75 cancellation fee. Na partial refunds will be made 'd you decide notb atbnd particular (unctions. No regisVatlons or cancellations will be axepted by telephone. No cancellations will ba accepted after February 2, 2009. Retum Conference Registration and Housing Form to: Fax: 703.631.6288 (Credit Card and Purchase Orders Only - No Checks) Mail: NLC Meeting Services, Go J. Spargo 8 Associates, 11208 Waples Mill Road, Suite 112, Fairfax, VA 22030 For more information and/or changes: Email: nlcregandhousinglajspargo.com Phone: 888319.3864 or 703.449.6418 Office use only:Payment Check# Amount Office use only: Hotel Subblk Cate Rate • AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # 11 REPORT # 17 J REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 S VEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITZE ~~ --- - - - -- ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the 2009 Social Service agency funding and authorizing the City Manager to reduce the total funding allocation by 7% for a total of $92,500. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Authorize the City Manager to reduce the 2009 social services funding allocation by 7% for a total amount of $92,500 and forward the revised amount to the Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council for their review and recommended allocation . II. BACKGROUND The City is now in the process of reacting to the impending severe cuts in the State Local Government Aid (LGA) payments for 2009. The cuts may be in the range of $1,000,000 and will pose a tremendous financial burden upon the City and force deep cuts in the adopted 2009 budget. Staff is now in the process of drafting proposed cuts in all departments of the City and the City Manager has instructed all department heads to review their respective budgets with a goal of providing reductions in the range of 7%-10%. This will result in cuts in service, reduction of work hours of some employees, a freeze in the hiring of vacant positions, the early retirement of some employees and likely layoffs. As a part of that process, it is the City Manager's recommendation that the budgeted social service funding of $99,470 for 2009 also be reduced a commensurate amount to the . reductions faced by the operating departments of the City. A 7% reduction in the 2009 social service allocation would result in reduction of $6,970 to $92,500. While some departments in the City may see reductions of up to 10%, staff does not recommend a reduction of this allocation beyond 7% for 2009. 0113socsertunds Obviously, the reduction of these funds is a very difficult action to take. However, there will • be more very difficult actions to take in the next several weeks and it would seem appropriate that all. areas share in the reductions that will be necessary. The Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council (RCHSPC) has already reviewed the social service funding for 2009 and has made a recommendation to the City for funding allocations for 2009 based on the $99,470 amount contained in the 2009 budget. If a reduction is to be made to the total allocation, the new amount should be forwarded to the RCHSPC as soon as possible so that they may adjust their recommendations accordingly. If the City Council does not decide to make any reductions in the 2009 allocations, then they may adopt the attached resolution approving the 2009 social service agency funding as proposed and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreements for service with those respective. agencies. The following process was used by the RCHSPC in making their funding recommendations for 2009: • The RCHSPC established the following priority areas for funding consideration: 1) services for vulnerable senior residents; 2) services for individuals, families, teens and/or children at risk; 3) housing support services for low-income persons and persons at risk. • An announcement was made soliciting funding proposals for service in the Richfield Sun. Applications were sent to prospective agencies. • The Grant Review Committee met on October 27 and December 1 to review proposals from the applicant agencies and make recommendations for funding. Following is a history of City of Richfield Social Service grant awards. The Grant Review Committee recommends $99,470 of City Other Agency Division funds be allocated to the following agencies in the amounts indicated for 2009 (see attachments, page 1, for service descriptions): I Organization 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Rec I Senior Community Services 9,070 9,070 9,070 11,500 12,000 Cornerstone 13,500 13,500 15,000 15,000 15,000 Storefront 30,000 30,000 28,000 28,000 28,000 Family & Children's Services 10,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 I VEAP 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 17,000 I Richfield READY 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 ~ MIRA 10,000 9,285 10,470 Church of New Life I 2,500 I Loaves & Fishes 3,000 3,000 4,000 Bethany Covenant Church 7,285 NA CAPSH 5,000 NA I Assumption Church 8,000 I NA I RCC Community Dialogue 500 I NA • I Oak Grove Church 7,000 NA HRA-Kids at Home 5,000 NA House of Prayer 10,000 I NA RF Schools/ Augsburg Library 1,500 NA TOTAL $93,570. $93,570 $93,570 $96,570 $99,470 • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY _ • All funding recommendations meet the priorities established for 2009 .(see attached "Guidelines and Instructions for 2009 Funding Assistance" and "2009 Application for Funding Assistance"). • Agencies recommended for funding have met review criteria in the areas of service need and program management (see attached "Guidelines and Instructions for 2009 Funding Assistance" and "2009 Application for Funding Assistance"). • Agencies recommended for#unding have stated service outcomes and have established methods for evaluating service results. • Agencies recommended for funding are receptive to collaboration and several participate in HSSC and the Richfield Community Council. • Recommendations in regards. to funding are advisory. Final determination is subject to Council approval. Council has the discretion to revise amounts. • B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Services are to be provided in calendar year 2009. • If a reduction in the total amount of the social service funding is to be made, it should be done as soon as possible so that the respective agencies can be informed of this decision. C. FINANCIAL The City is facing severe cuts for 2009 and the entire spectrum of services provided by the City should be reviewed for potential reductions. Recommendations are based on the unallocated portion ($99,470- Human Services-Programs) of the 2009 Other Agencies Division Budget, 10105. A City Council/Administration 2009 allocation of $25,720 of this budget is designated for the Hennepin South Services Collaborative for research, planning and coordination functions. D. LEGAL • Agencies awarded funding will be required to sign a service agreement. IV. AL1r:KNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ J • Authorize the City Manager to reduce the 2009 social service funding allocation by an amount lesser than or greater than the recommended 7% • and forward the revised amount to the Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council for their review and recommended allocation . • .Approve the resolution providing funding in the 2009 budgeted amount of $99,470 as allocated for certain human service agencies and authorize the City Manager to execute agreements for service with those agencies funded by the City. V. ATTACHMENTS • Descriptions of Proposed Services • Guidelines and Instructions for 2009 Funding Assistance • 2009 Application for Funding Assistance • Draft Minutes of 12/1/08 RCHSPC Meeting • 2008 RCHSPC Members VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • .None anticipated. • • ll-l RESOLUTION NO. • • A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2009 SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICE WITH THOSE AGENCIES FUNDED BY THE CITY WHEREAS, a review committee has been formed comprised of the Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council (RCHSPC) members to serve as the review and recommending group for City Social Service Funds; and WHEREAS, this committee reviewed applications from human service agencies for City Social Service Funds. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield that the funds be allocated as follows: Organization Cornerstone -Criminal Justice Intervention Family & Children's Service -School Succe Senior Community Services -Senior Outre ch Program The Storefront Group -Youth Counseling Program Volunteers Enlisted to Assist People (NEAP) Richfield R.E.A.D.Y. Scholarship Program MIRA-Programs, Information & Referral Services Loaves and Fishes Church of New Life - Kidz Adventure Club TOTAL Recommendation $15, 000 8, 000 12, 000 28,000 17, 000 2, 500 10,470 4, 000 2, 500 $99,470 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager be authorized to execute contractual agreements with the above-named agencies summarizing services to be provided to Richfield residents. Passed, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of January, 2009. Debbie Goettel, Mayor • Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk • • • CITY OF RICHFIELD 2009 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OTHER AGENCY DIVISION SOCIAL SERVICE FUNDING ASSISTANCE RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL Agency-Program Church of New Life - "Kidz Adventure Club" Cornerstone -Criminal Justice Intervention Program Family & Chi/dren's Service - School Success MIRA -Program, Information & Referral Services Loaves & Fishes Richfield R. E.A. D. Y. - Scholarshi" Program Senior Community Services - Senior Outreach Program The Storefront Group -Youth, Counseling Program Volunteers Enlisted to Assist People (NEAP) Description of Services Low-cost after-school program for children and youth that will increase their success and achievement in school and increase their leadership and pro-social skills. Cornerstone's Community Based Services provides support and advocacy to Richfield residents who are victims of domestic assault. _ Promotes improved school performance of disadvantaged children in grades K-3 (including children in low-income families, families of color, and immigrant families) who are strugglina with literacy. Information, referral and program services to the Latino community of Richfield. MIRA serves prFinarily low-income residents and offers various services for individuals and families to improve their well being! Provide nutritious meals to the hungry in an atmosphere of hospitality and develop joint ventures/partnerships with like-minded organizations to assist guests with additional basic needs key to becoming self-sufficient. p Program will provide Bilingual Summer Activities Catalog, scholarships for youth programs, attendance motivators and support of community and youth events. Provides in-home counseling and service (or, care) coordination to frail elders and their families that assists older residents to remain independent as long as possible. Counseling services for adolescents and their families to increase strengths and pro- social behaviors and decrease barriers and nega ive behaviors. Provide basic needs services to low-income families and individuals through Food Programs, Social Service Programs, Transportation Programs and Seasonal Programs. 2009 Recommendations 2,500 15,000 8, 000 10,4'0 4, 000 1 2,500 12,000 28.aao 17,000 TOTAL „ 99,470 -f-3 CITY OF RICHFIELD • GUIDELINES AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR 2009 FUNDING ASSISTANCE The Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council (RCHSPC) is responsible for setting priorities for City of Richfield Social Service funding and for making recommendations for grant awards. Each year the RCHSPC examines the City Social Service Funding process to determine funding parameters and priority goals for the purpose of making the best use of funds. Funding Parameters Any non-profit organization is eligible to apply. Projects must serve Richfield residents. Because of limited funds, requests made should not cover all expenses of a proposed service. Priority Goals Projects must address at least one of the following priorities: • Services for vulnerable senior residents • Services for individuals, families, teens and/or children at risk • Housing support services for low-income persons and persons at risk Award Criteria Priority will be given to proposals that meet the following criteria: • Demonstrated need of the proposed service for the targeted population. • Collaboration with other service providers. • Participation in the Richfield Community Council and Hennepin South Services Collaborative and its related activities. • Efforts to serve cultural/ethnic/racial populations and low-income persons. • Demonstrated value to the community. • Does not duplicate services to Richfield residents. - - - --_ - -- • (Completed applications must be submitted by October 13, 2008] 11- ~ PLEASE DON'T FORGET THESE CITY OF RICHFIELD INSTRUCTIONS GUIDELINES AND INSTRUCTIONS • FOR 2009 FUNDING ASSISTANCE Page 2 ~ APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS The attached Application for Funding Assistance must be used in your request for funds. Proposals MUST: • Use the 2009 Application Questions. • Include agency and program name and address, and contact person name, title, phone #, fax # and Email address as applicable. • Be typewritten, printed on both sides and include page numbers. PLEASE SUBMIT PROPOSALS WITH 2-SIDED PRINTING • Include the questions along with the responses. • Be as brief, clear and concise as possible. • NOT include expensive binding, brochures, letters of support or materials not asked for in the application. • NOTE: Make sure you are using the updated 2009 Instructions and Application Questions. • Submit 1 original plus 11 hard copies and 1 email coav (TOTAL 13 COPIES) of completed application by October 13, 2008 to: Kathy Farris Human Services Planner/Coordinator City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 Kfarris(a~citvofrichfield.orq. J The RCHSPC will review applications for social service funds at its October 27 meeting. Applicants may be asked to respond in writing to additional questions. The RCHSPC will determine 2009 funding recommendations no later than mid December 2008. The Richfield City Council will approve grant awards at its January 13, 2009 City Council meeting. Agencies awarded social services grants will be required to sign a service agreement for calendar year 2009 and submit semi-annual reports on service outcomes. Organizations are encouraged to contact Kathy Farris at 612-861-9754, Kfarris(a?.citvofrichfield.org with any questions and for assistance in completing grant applications. ~~Completed applications must be submitted by October 13, 2008) 1 I-~ CITY OF RICHFIELD • 2009 APPLICATION FOR SOCIAL SERVICE FUNDING ASSISTANCE PROPOSAL HEADING 1. Agency name, address, contact person, and phone/fax/email 2. Amount of request 3. Name of proposed service 4. Brief description of service 5. Identify priority area(s) you are addressing: a) Services for vulnerable senior residents b) Services for individuals, families, teens and/or children at risk c) Housing support services for low-income persons and persons at risk ADMINISTRATION 1. Provide a mission statement for your agency. 2. Provide verification of your organization's non-profit legal status. 3. Indicate your total agency budget for 2009. 4. Indicate your proposed project budget for 2009. Itemize proposed expenses and describe as applicable. Indicate both proposed City funds and other funds to support the project. PROGRAM • 1. Demonstrate the need for the proposed service. 2. Describe service to be funded. Include: a) Brief statement depicting what the service is and how service is provided b) Target population(s); estimated number of unduplicated individuals you plan to serve c) Admission criteria and process d) How clients are involved in the planning process for service e) Desired client outcomes and methods of evaluating and measuring client progress (use attached "Proposed Outcome/Evaluation Methods" form) 3. Describe efforts to outreach to target population, including immigrant and low- income individuals. 4. If city funds were reduced or not available after 2009, how you would continue to provide the service. COLLABORATION EFFORTS 1. Are you a partner in the Richfield Community Council, Hennepin South Services Collaborative or the Children's Mental Health Collaborative? If so, briefly describe your involvement. 2. Describe your efforts to collaborate with other agencies including your involvement in developing and participating in these collaborations. Organizations are encouraged to contact Kathy Farris at 612-861-9754, KFarrisCa~citvofrichfield.orc~ with any questions and for assistance in completing granf applications. ~~Completed applications must be submitted by October 13, 2008 City of Richfield Social Ser~ Funding Programs - 2009 Proposed. Outcomes/Evaluation Methods Name of Applicant Organization: Address: Contact Person: Phone: Email: Brief description of service for which funding is requested: Outcomes: State 3 to 5 measurable outcomes of proposed Indicators: Describe methods of evaluating proposed service - relate outcomes to client aro rq ess outcomes -how you will measure client aroaress Outcomes indicate what result, benefit, or change would come from the service provided. Outcomes can be' 1) initial, such as increased knowledge, ~ understanding, or skills; 2)intermediate. such as change in a specific behavior or } g g _ f people. attitude; or 3 lon term, such as a than ern the condition or status o~ ~o ~_ _~~__ T ___~~ 1 Completed applications must be submitted by October 13, 2008~~ DRAFT I-7 RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES • PLANNING COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES December 1, 2008 Present: Anthony Bradford; Joan Helmberger; Joan Kraft; Jeanette Lofstrom; Jo Romer (chair); Sarah Till; Kathy Farris (staff) Approval of October 27. 2008 Meeting Minutes • • The minutes were approved Recommendations for 2009 Funding Assistance Responses from Church of New Life and MIRA were reviewed, and there was a suggestion to take another look at the programs that have received the highest awards over the years. It was determined that grant criteria be redefined for 2010. It was agreed that basic needs were in high demand and to focus on this area for this year's grants. The following recommendations were approved by consensus: '' Agenc -Pro ram Church of New Life - `Kidz Adventure Club" Cornerstone,-.Community Services Program , Family & Children "s Service -School Success MIRA -Program, Infiormation & Referral Services Loaves & Fishes Richfield R. E.A. D. Y. - Scholarship Program Senior Community Services -Senior Outreach Program The Storefront Group - Youfh Caun efing Program Volunteers Enlisted to Assist People (NEAP) TOTAL 2009 Meeting Schedule :2009 Recommendations 2,500 15,000 8,000 10,470 4,000 2,500 12,000 28,000 17,000 $99,470 The following schedule was approved for 2009: Location: Richfield City Hall, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Heredia Room Time: 4th Monday of Every Month; 5:30 - 6:30 p.m. -unless otherwise noted Date Potential agenda items 1/26 No meeting 2/23 No meeting 3/23 Brainstorm Social Service funding criteria for 2010; review demographics. 4/27 Determination of grant priorities; grant application materials approved 5/25 No meeting -Memorial Day 6/22 Speaker: representative from schools re: needs of students/families 7/27 No meeting 8/24 No meeting 9/28 Panel: three grant recipients e.g., Storefront, NEAP, Cornerstone 10/26 2010 Social Service Grant Proposal Review/Recommendations 11/23 If needed -Continue 2009 Social Service Grant Recommendations 12/28 No meeting DRAFT if-~ Other Kathy announced her resignation as Human Services Coordinator with the City of Richfield. Jo thanked Kathy for her work on the RCHSPC and all wished her well in the future. Next Meetina The next RCHSPC meeting is scheduled for Mondav. March 23. 5:30 - 6:30 q.m., in the Heredia Room. Recording Secretary Kathy Farris • 1(-~] City of Richfield Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council 2008 Membership Name Representation Address Phone Email Anthony Human Rights 6321 2nd Ave. So. 612-618-0321 Anthonvlbradford~hotmail.com Bradford Commission-Alternate Richfield,'MN 55423 Beth Fagin Richfield Community 6425 Nicollet Ave. S. 612-798-8174 Bfaain~"'a storefront arty Gounctl , Richf~cld, h9N 5423 Joan HRA 6914 Park Ave. S. 612-869-8057 Joanhelmberaer(~yahoo.com Helmberger Richfield, MN 55423 Jeff Karr Planning Commission- 7120-12th Ave. S. J.karr1(a~Fairyiew.orq Alternate Richfield, MN 55423 Joan Kraft Human Rights 6621 Sheridan Ave. S. 612-861-4091 joan kraft~~cbca.com Commission Richfield. MN 55423 Jeanette League of Women 7325 5th Ave. So. 612-869-3772 lelofstrom~?msn com Lofstrom Voters Richfield, MN 55423 Catherine Planning Commission 6636 Thomas Ave S 612-861-2409 catpeloouin(awahoo.com Peloquin Richfield, MN 55423 Jo Romer Advisory Board on 705 Aldrich Ave. S. 612-869-~08~ J.romert~tn(a~,~uno.cnm (chaff{) Health Richfield, MN 55423 , Sarah Till Community Services 6733 Russell Ave. So. 612-866-5910 sctill<a~gmail.com Commission Richfield, MN 55423 .Susan City Council Liaison 6633 Thomas Ave. S. 612-866-2683 SuPros~nhera~~enmcast net Rosenberg Riehfrel~i,MN 5542.'3 Lynda Gault .Richfield Public..> 7001 Harriet Ave. S. 612-798-6000 Lynda.aualt;arichfield.k12.mn.us . Schools Liaison Richfield, MN 55423 Daryl HSSC Liaison Coppoletti For RCHSPC use only. • 9801 Penn Ave. S. Bloomington, MN 55431 952-922-5999 DarvLc;oopoletti(a~hsscmn :ora 2/08 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # • J REPORT PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 13, 2009 OTHER BUSINESS 12 18 CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, EXEC. COORDINATOR N ,TITLE ~~ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of designating representatives to serve as 2009 liaisons to various metropolitan agencies and Citv commissions. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: . By Motion: Designate Council liaison appointments for 2009 to various metropolitan agencies and City commissions. , ~ II. BACKGROUND Members of the City Council serve as the City's representatives on various metropolitan agencies and City commissions. Each year, the Council appoints these representatives. Staff will notify the agencies and commissions of the appointments. ~ III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Each year, the City Council appoints representatives to serve as liaisons on various metropolitan agencies and City commissions. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City needs representation on metropolitan agencies and commissions. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Deter the designation to a future Council meeting. V. ATTACHMENTS • Liaison appointment list. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING . • None. 01131iaisons !' ~r / AGENCY 2008 LIAISON METRO CITIES BILL KILIAN, REP. SUE SANDAHL, ALT. • LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES DEBBIE GOETTEL, REP. SUE SANDAHL, ALT. NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE BILL KILIAN, REP. PAM DMYTRENKO, ALT. NOISE -BILL KILIAN, REP. DEBBIE GOETTEL, ALT. TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION SUE SANDAHL, LIA. BILL KILIAN. ALT. I-35W SOLUTIONS ALLIANCE SUE SANDAHL, LIA. MIKE EASTLING, ALT. 494 CORRIDOR COMMISSION SUE SANDAHL, LIA. TOM FOLEY, ALT. PLANNING COMMISSION DEBBIE GOETTEL, LIA. BILL KILIAN. ALT. COMM. SERVICES COMMISSION FRED WROGE, LIA. SUSAN ROSENBERG, ALT. • ADVISORY BOARD OF HEALTH DEBBIE GOETTEL, LIA. SUSAN ROSENBERG, ALT. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION SUSAN ROSENBERG, LIA. BILL KILIAN, ALT. FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION DEBBIE GOETTEL, LIA. SUE SANDAHL, ALT. ARTS COMMISSION SUSAN ROSENBERG, LIA. CELEBRATIONS COMMISSION SUSAN ROSENBERG, LIA. FRED WROGE, ALT. SUE SANDAHL, ALT. CITY HALL TASK FORCE FRED WROGE. LIA. BILL KILIAN, LIA. RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN SUSAN ROSENBERG, REP. SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL FOWL BOARD DEBBIE GOETTEL, REP. SUSAN ROSENBERG, ALT. SOUTHWEST CABLE COMMISSION FRED WROGE, REP. STEVE DEVICH, REP. SUE SANDAHL, ALT. RICHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY FRED WROGE RICHFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT SUSAN ROSENBERG, REP. FRED WROGE, ALT. NONE 2009 LIAISON 01/02/09