Loading...
02-24-2004 AgendaREVISED CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:30 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of February 10, 2004 PRESENTATION Legislative Update • Senator Jane Ranum • Representative Dan Larson • Representative Paul Thissen COUNCIL DISCUSSION 1A. Council discussion • Hats Off To Hometown Hits Augsburg Park Library Teen Art Contest Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 2. City Manager's report Notes: AGENDA APPROVAL 3. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4. 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 amendments to Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506 and 526 and Richfield City Code Section 920 to create regulation for firearms related uses and scheduling public hearing and second reading for March 23, 2004 S.R. No. 25 B. Consideration of approval of resolution declaring adequacy of petition for vacation of drainage and utility easement, first reading of transitory ordinance to vacate public easement, and scheduling public hearing and second reading to consider request to vacate public easement at 6300 Penn Avenue for March 23, 2004 S.R. No. 26 C. Consideration of approval of first reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from Special Revenue Fund and scheduling public hearing and second. reading for March 23, 2004 S.R. No. 27 D. Consideration of approval of resolution reappointing Robyn Goolsbey, Rudy Hanuman and Rhonda Osborne to Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for three-year terms ending December 31, 2006 S.R. No. 28 E. Consideration of approval of resolution establishing car allowance reimbursement policy S.R. No. 29 F. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing refunding of Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1996, with issuance of series 2004 Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2004; Village Shores S.R. No. 30 G. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Mitigation Plan as City of Richfield's Emergency Management Mitigation Plan S.R. No. 31 H. Consideration of approval of auction service contract renewal between City of Richfield and Auction Broadcasting Company of Minneapolis for auctioning of forfeited vehicles from Public Safety S.R. No. 32 1. Consideration of approval of purchase from Wick Ford for new 2004 Ford Explorer for use as Gopher State One Call locating vehicle used by Utility Division in amount of $20,919, plus tax and delivery charge S.R. No. 33 Notes: 5. Consideration of item(s), if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: RESOLUTION 6. Consideration of resolution amending 2003 General Fund budget by authorizing transfer of appropriations from Public Works Department to Fire Services Department Staff Report No. 34 Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 7. Consideration of proposal from Orfield Labs regarding airport noise monitoring program Staff Report No. 35 Notes: 8. Discussion of Phase II of Public Answering Service Point (dispatch) consolidation study (Information to be provided at meeting) Notes: 9. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: 10.Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative Services Director at 612-861-9702. STAFF REPORT AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 OTHER BUSINESS 7 35 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: PAM DMYTRENKO; ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Whether or not to accept the two-phase proposal submitted by Orfield Labs to conduct baseline noise measurements in east Richfield, including a preliminary investigative phase and a design and execution phase. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Reject the first phase of the proposal because of its redundancy and proceed with the second phase, with the request that some elements of the first phase, such as the initial inves#igation and research, be incorporated into one main proposal. III. BACKGROUND In September 2003, the City Council sent out Requests for Proposals (RFP) to national noise consultants in order to conduct a baseline noise measurement project along-east Richfield in anticipation of the opening of the new North/South Runway in October 2005. Because of the small number of proposals received, the Council decided to delay the project in order to gather more information about noise monitoring. On February 3, 2004, the City Council and members of City staff, held a Council Worksession at Orfield Labs in Minneapolis. O~eld Labs was the only local company that to respond to the September RFP and had invited the Council to visit their facility. The February 3 Worksession provided an opportunity to learn more about Orfield Labs and its capabilities, and to discuss the overall approach of the monitoring project. At the end of the Worksession, the Council requested that 02240rfield Proposal Orfield Labs submit another proposal to the City based on discussions that an attempt to communicate and collaborate with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) on acceptable ways to approach the noise monitoring project might be very helpful to the success of the project. The second Ofield proposal was received at the end of the day on February 19 and has been reviewed by staff. Upon review, staff has determined that much of what is proposed in Phase One of the project, titled "Preliminary Investigation," is redundant and should be incorporated into the "Design and Execution" phase - or main portion of the project. Furthermore, it appears that some elements of the first phase can be undertaken by staff and Council, such as initial communication with the FAA. In fact, Mayor Kirsch and City Manager Orduno, have a meeting scheduled at Congressman Sabo's office in Washington D.C. on March 9 with FAA representative Carl Burleson. This meeting would provide an opportunity to discuss the noise monitoring project and to ask for the FAA's assistance in determining an acceptable approach to gathering the information. Because of the significant increased cost to the project with the addition of the preliminary investigative phase, staff is recommending that only the second phase of the proposal be considered. Minor changes to incorporate the necessary research, scope and details should be requested of Orfield Labs. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • As established in the City Council/Staff goals, the City is committed to conducting baseline noise monitoring along the eastern border of Richfield to determine the affects of the operation of the new North/South Runway on residents. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • It is necessary to perform the initial noise monitoring prior to the operation of the North/South Runway, expected in late 2005. • It was determined at the February 3 Council Worksession that it is in the best interests of the City to attempt to communicate and collaborate with the FAA and the MAC in order to try to determine what would. be acceptable conditions of sampling and what metrics should be used to quantify the noise exposure. C. FINANCIAL • As outlined in the February 18, 2004 Orfield Labs proposal, the cost of the project is broken down into two phases: Preliminary Investigation Phase: $24,000 Design and Execution of Baseline Noise Monitoring: $58,000 • The City has budgeted $60,000 from the 2004 General Fund for the baseline noise monitoring project. D. LEGAL • No RFP is required to proceed with this project because it is of a service nature. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Accept the entire proposal as submitted and determine where the additional funds will come from. • Request that OrField Labs resubmit their proposal with any changes in scope determined by the Council V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposal from Orfield Labs dated February 18, 2004. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None FEBRUARY 18, 2004 Ortleld laboratories Inc ~~o ~~r ~~~ ~~ ~G ~~~ ~~ =PARED FOR.. Sarnar~tha Qndctrro Manager Pam Dmytrenko istant tQ Ci~luhanage~ of Richfield MN 55423 X12) 86i-~70S Samantha._ 1 ~ 8fr1-9~a2~ Pam 30JEC7 -estigation 8~ Measu-ert~ant of iseRne Low-Frequency iVoise Levels Eastern-Ri~h~ie~d- PREAARED BY Steven .>! Orfietd David M. Berg O~eld Laboratories, inc. 27os East 2ra~' Street Minneapolis, f1AN 55446 Voice (6T2r721-2455 FAX (612) 721-2457 e-rnaif dava4Dotffeldlabs.com )CATION :hfield, MN is proposal is being submitted in respotr,~ to our ongoigg discussions with i City of Richfield rega~ng the impacf of low it®quency noise resulting from - new nor4h-south rur-way at MSP airport. Giant City of Richfield INTRODUCTfQN Pare Drnytrenkaot thB=City of Richfield contacted Daidd.~erg of.Orfield Laboratones, Inc. (oL) to request a quotation far performing envrronmental noise monitoringg in-the 18~' Avenue f. Cedar Avenue area m Eastern Richfield. A written request for pro~sal: was receiued at our oitlfi'~es via email on September 29, 2003. In ad~ition, Steven Orfield discussetl details of the RFP andthisquote with Samantha-Orduno. Atluotat-on dated October 17; 2003 was provided in response fo the RFP. Subsequent discussions have confirmed that the original~ ritten RFP left many issues to be determined. A meeting of the Richfield City CbunCii was held on .Tuesday. February 3~° atQrfieitd Laboratories' facility. to. urther discuss these rssues: In the maetirrg, rf viras-agreed that it would be appropriate to approach the issues with an attempt icy-gain the cooperation of agencies including tha F.A.A::and-the. MAC xegardingttte conditions of sampling e;~d the metric(s~ used to quantify the low frequency noise exposure. At minimum, the process would prawdea-discussion-withthese~these agencies-andan. portunity to comment on any propossctmeast;rrerrr~tptart. tssttes under invastr anon -may. irr~}ado the definition of sampling dates andtimes,-exact sampling procedure, agreement of metric datinition~s,~.selactioc~.nf appropriate measurement locations,.-baseline measurement, and dehniUon of traffic nose components. This proposal- is irtterrd+er#~to~prt~ride a #ramgwork for this prot~ss: YVe recognize that the baseline measurement:phase of the pro ect must begin within a reasonable time frame, hc1£ .it't;i important-to ensure-that ~~ maasuretttent plans have been discussed withthe parties involved andof#ers of cotiatzoration and cooperation are shared with the MAG and thef.A:A. BACKGROUND Orfield Laboratories is uniquely qualified to perform studies in sit areas of acoustics; including_the area af-perceptua{; subjective acoustics. Urfield's staff has pioneered the developtof`advanced subjective research methods that have been successful{y used in sound qualify research and development for numerous lart~acorpotatlonaworldwide; ineludingeomPFe~ienSiYB stUd18S for a major aircraft manufacturer ancf for a large national airline. Orfietd Labs maintaicss.acofx>,pr+ehensivetest.facilitythatirns~~Ludes laboratories accredited under NIST's National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program {N.Vt.AP scope_of accreditation rc>'de 20024t3.Oj tapettorcrtseveral standard acoustical tests incitrd'mgF~roratory and field soundtransmissionc~oss, (STC and FSTC}: These and other measuraments and studies that are integral to the stated'goatsofthe..Latac:Fces;uency Policy Committee R"epi©r<. Urfi®!d'.s-#acitities_include-studios.and-equipmen~capable.P# presenting and conducting contro~ed`sul~ji3ctive sound 9uality detection orannoyance studies. Individuals-on Qrfield's staff have been involved with designing. and conducting 'these'types of measuGemeNs..and.subjective studies-fo~ave~ten-hrs. Fir,ally,-Ortield's Minneapolis location provides not ardy. dose proximity, but .also provides uswithrb~ttte area and manyof3he factors and history. involved with MSP noise issues. We took forward io working with fife City of RichlieltF on-this an~oiherfuture-pr~ojacts_ ONioid Laboratories Iric rC~-17 L'YJC14 1 ('UYJ UICI- 1 GL7! LI'1DV(\fl 1 tJl~ 1 L.J Protect Low Frequency4~to[se Study Chen! Giry of Richfield PROJECT INTENT t. Prettmtnaryr lnvestigation- Weare proposing a preiiminary.praject phase in order to n3view the history and available ttteratura and to tocaie the appropriate ~tacts in order to open a diatog with representatives at FAA and MAC. The phase will. include • Literature review of existing. Richfield work to date • literature review-ot existing work performed in.Qther communities and other relevant studies or papers • Contact. ke}c persons and open cooperative diai4g representing Richfield's concerns (as possible) • Define di3failei3 scope-and details of baseline mQasurement phase • Prepare summary memorandum of t'hase t resuHs ft, Design and Execute Baseline Ehvironmental Noise Monitor Baseline measurements must be pertormed before the gpening of the new north: south runway in 2005. Several details of the measurement plan are unknown at thin time. 1Ata propose the definition of a budget and the design of the most appropriate study that meets this budget. Several issues to be considered in the p~eparatioh and planning of the baseline measurements including: • A prapriate batancr3 between number of Locations and time duration of requiredn-onitoring: • Selection of proper analysis metrics • Inclusion of waveform recording for ability to analyze data in different ways • Selection ofinsfrumentation to meet the requirements and budget. • Deliver to the City of fiichtietd a technical repoi# summarizing the- measurement prtscedures and monitored tow frequency ambient noiselevels a! BaCi} site for selected time- periods. Ill. Possible Metrics Raw data far several metrics magbe togged at a sampling rate to be determined. Thasa data may include dBA. dBL, d6C. The 1/3 octave- bandlevels forfregrtencieS centered at~5t+r, 31.5Hz; AOHz, 50Hz. 63Nz and 80Hz shalt also be fogged at the propo&ed sample rate. A matrix representing a possible sound data set to be considered is presented m Table 1. oAteld Laboratories Inc client City at Rlchtleld dBA .dBL dBG 25Hz 3t.5Hz 4oHz 50Hz 63Hz 80Wz Leq x x x x x x ~ x x Lma3c -- x.. : x _ - x-_ . . _ x.... . x . _ _ x._ ._ x x x tmin x x x x x x x x x Laq x- x x- x x x ~ x x L1__ x-_ x. x. _ ... x. x... x. x x x L7o x x x x x x x x x L50 x x x x x x ~F x x L9C:. x x x x. _ x x_ x x x L99 x x x x x x x x x SEL x _ -_ LFSL Frequency count -individual event levels -dose Environ- Average and peak temperature, humidity, barometric mental pressure-wtadspeed; uvind drrectiort~ observed precipitation Table f -1ilf>att"ffx :oi Passible fiats Coifactfon A review.of:literature available.to.usat.the_wtiting_,~Ythis proposal suggests some roortsfor interpretation in the calculation and reporting of LFSL, and LFSL dose levels. LFSL is defined by the Expert Panel and the Low Frequency Noise Policy Committee as a single-event noise metric that sums the maximum one-third octave band sotsr-diev~els?fram-2~ to BEt lf~snclusiv~ tRfat occur during the course of an individual aircraft pass-by. LFSL has -not been wi`defy accepted as a standard environmental acoustic measure and current analysis equipment does not provide this type of analysis ar result wilts a~degree of aufomation. e l of this proposal will #ake a closer look at the arguments for and against the calculation of this rnetrie: f !V, Deliverables Project deliverables to include the following items: • Summary RepQrt:indicating findings from liti3iatar~e reviews and other Phase I discussions • Detemtinatiottotexactmeasurementgoals, procgduresand metrics • Environmental noise study within proposed budget . OAleld Lahoratorie9 inc diem City of RiChfleld Draft of technical reporE summarizing the measurement. procedures and monitored low frequency ambient noise levels at each. site and period- • Upon revision and approval of She draft technical report, Crfeld dabs shall-prepare-and submit a final techruaarr~port (1 revision !s included: this wllf not include a change is scope). Orfiekt-t=abs shag also host at our facility, at no additional cost, one meeting with the City in the planning phase and. ons meeting. after delurery of final-report and results. Additional meetings will be charged at the hourly rate described in the tee section. SECURITY ANfl-LtIkBIEFTY Analyzers shalFbe located inside private homes-or bu-ldings that are considered to be secure from theft or vandalism. Microphone systems and any. weather monitoring:sonsors to be locatedin secure areas adjacent to these homes or btiig~. 61rt~1 laboratories is cunentry~investigating issues of liability and insurance regarding these test systems and their locations; this wiN be communicated to the Gty of Rleht-eld. ~etivery of this- study and the- results of this study on the proposed schedule are contir-genton faEtarsiks3t tray-be outof.our consrol, 1't~ese factors include equipment failure or malfunction, equipment vandalism, equipment theft, severe weather orother-acts of God: Faituret~cie#ver propaseckmanltoring and-.. results on proposed schedule due fo these :and other unforeseen factors shalt not be eonsideredbreechof contract. Every alfart will be made to avoid and to prevent these sue, a~tep~f~timeiy resotut~on, if so required. SCMEQt}~ f Upon rase' of our signed proposal or a purchase order authorizing-our proposal, Phase Fshatkccmmence and be concluded-.with~'~t 6Q-9Q d2tys of the contractual agreement. Tha baseline measurement schedule and budget are to be determined-and-thaconclusion-of Phasatr . Otlleld Laboratories Inc r ~n-• ~-ever-e i i - e.,i ..n,~ ....~~. ~......... .....,... ~... Ctlent City of Richtleld FEES Ali fees are biliedas quoted-vn a flat fee basis, unless otherwise noted.- BiNings arson t month inten+als and are"due in 30 days; work ma be suspended for non-payment, andfutt"payment must precede addiC~onafip~ased work Any sennces not-offered-taut-requested will-baquoted for approval. Expenses noted in thefo#lowing-seetiort.reirnburserrteat"ef-expenses; at~a-addit~ertat-to-the f®es quoted and-a~ charged including a 20~o processing I k~andling fee. Interest rates on unp~ b8lances are accumulated at the rate of 2% per month on outstanding_6alacsces ..N~ c,ollection costs are the attion of the Gient. 6iliings are due uport completion of monthly contract work d not upon execution"of.the-~rajecifor-which that_workwas intended. This project is quoted on asst-fee" basrs-aafafRfv~ {Fses"are based on hourly rates of $150-$20Et for consulting a#orts and $200-$300 orr days of testimony and depositions. C Higher figures are,fnc,S.Yuen;-C~rfis#d:"This.:praje+crrs quoted an a set lee basis denvod from time and systems ernpby®das follows: PHASFf- lNVESTfiaA_~Ciftt"ANQ C8N1`ACT"PEfiASE~ S2A,000 Design, Preparation and Performance of "under sactiott-Cas-described above {Time limited 3 manlweekbeset.effoits process) i PHASE II - BASEL:IN€" ~A3t1REMENT PHASE S51<,000 Prior budget for baseline measurement {This may be changed after Phase 1 at the opt'wn of the client)._ Note' "This proposal is in response to-the City of Richfield / OrField Laboratories discussions"to"date. Proposed scriedules, exact terms, d®#ivsrab#as atrtd costs ar®subject to negoo~~aattiropn and refinement. ADDITIONAL SERVIOES°~IEDBfT10NAL -COST) i . Adiiitionat meetings. not quoted. 2 Additional reports 3. Additional- testing and "sits visits" beyomt those-specified 4. Additional, non-quoted consulting REIMBURSEMENT ~""EXPi='I~SES Ddteld laboratories Irtc Ait known expensesare included in the proposal. -Any add~ional expenses to be pre-approved and billed to the client, at cost. Prolsct .Lora Frequency Noise Study Client City Of iilchfield Orfteld laboratories Inc CONFIDENTIALITY The client has full controtaverthis information and any release of information will be only to the client: The specific testing results are deemed to be canfidentiat exclusively far-the'Wientis use- Orfield-l.aboratoties-invoNrement.onttiis.pmjeCtis.ccantidentiaL (t is requested that the clientnotusaOrtietdtsboratories' name and testing information in any pubtrc manner without advance agreement or written consent. o+scLOSUt~E Orfield Laboratories lass, in`thePasi, conducted sound quality studies and noise measurements for a. promtneni national airline. These studies focused on int®rioraircraft sound quality a~measttr+ements-and not oft environmental noise issues. Qrtield Laboratories has also conducted studies for a major aircraft rrtanufacturer, These studies focused on interior aircraft sound quality. and measurett~ente a~~ton environmental noise issues No cunentwork rs .under contract for these or other aircraft noise related clients. _ r3-fieldCaboratories Etas natperftitmed warirfor the Metropolitan Airports Commission or Minneapolis t St: Rant lrtterttationai Airport. Orfield laboratories has performed environmental noise studies. including studies of aircraft-rioissfor ¢rtrzen groups cancemed with~rc-aft noise and their affect on the communities and resrdenis. DOCUMENTS dur testing work often requires a set of documernts detailing: the structure of the device to he testecfdrawrrtc conventional scats that are avatfabl~frotrt our clientat.aacost_ Specific documents and information requested at the com .per; _ 1. Background information and resuNs of prior studies or reports and descnpttons ate documentation of measurerrtea~s or catcutatlons or methods useful to tfiis project. 2. Maps, plans end f or aerial photographs of-area~under consideration CONSULTIN~3 SERVICES The field of acoustical and vibration consulting are not recognized under any prof®ssianat.regis/ration practice, Any se-uices rreeded_.in licensed areas related to our work, such as mechanical; electrical, siructural,engineering and architecture are the specific responsibility of the client and are not offered implied by QrfiatdrLabnratates~fnc._ _ _ CtisAt City of Richfield { (3UARENTEES While ssnrices-offered-ar+econsfdered t4 be-state of the aaf~tt m approach, any specific stipulations as to the performance of particular deigns must be stated by the client; or no stt~utatians are assumed to be present. LegaEliability for work performer!-is EitatRrebtc~ai costs of those seeric~es-whlch,are found to be subject to maim. under independent arbitration (AAA). L®gal fiabl6ty is limited to ttre total- fees contracted under- Phis proposal attct no-pugitlve damages are to be included. Under thi& contract, tarfietd Laboratories is indemnified from fagot liatbitity and judgments above this contract fee level. We look forward working with you on this project. j PRdPtiSAt_.. ACGEPTARI~E__. Steven J~ OMie{d- Qrtietd faboratorlas, inc. February 19, 2~4 Authorized- Slanature C[ty Ot Rtchtield -Date: 0lilaltl!_atwrataies Inc Ctlent City of AiChfleld ~ ORFIELD SCfaPE faF ACCREDITATION Otfield laboratories, Inc. has been accredited #q the tJ:S. Department of Commerc®~ Natianai Institute of Standards and Technology KIST} under their National Voluntary laboratory Accreditation Program (N~t~} Dods 200248-0 to perform the follow test. services. NVLAP COQE 6esfgnadon artd Short Title 08/P06- ASTfUI €90 Laboratory Measurement of Airborne Sound Transmission Lossaf Building Panitions. OS/P10 ANSI 512.31 DeterminatiarrofSoanr~PowerLevelsgf Broad-Band Noise Sources in Reverberation Rooms 08/P21 ISO 3745 Determination. of Sound Power Levels of Noise SourCeS - Precision-Methods for Arteehoie and Sa~r-i-Anechoic Rooms_ 08/P31 ASTM E336 Measutrem~ts_of Airborne Sound )nstll~tion in Buildings 08JP32 ASTM E1007 Fiefif"M"easurement of Tapping Macttine'tmpaCt Sound Transmission Through Floor-CeiNng Assemblies and Ase~iat~ support Structures _. 08lP37 ASTM E96& Guide--fo~tcefd•Measurement of Ai~omc~ Sound Insulation in Building Facades and Fagade Elements CITY REFERENCES Gity of Minneapolis - Mr. Greg Goeke Faci~ties. Manager Currie Maihtenance FaciNty 350 S 5th St Minneapolis..MN 5541.5 (612x673=210f3- City of Maple Grove Michael Opatx Transppoottatton Coordinator Administrator 9401- Fembrook-Lane AI: Maple Grove, MN 55369 {763j 494-6005 City of Lakeville Patrick Mc Garvey- City Administrator 20195 Holyoke Avenue Lakeville, MN 55044- {952} 985-4403 Orfleld LAGor~torias !nc TOTAL P. 10 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24,.2004 Resolution 6 34 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAME, TIT DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~~ SIGNATURE ~1 REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution amending the allocation of the 2003 General Fund Budget. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution amending the 2003 General Fund Budget by authorization of a transfer of appropriations from the Public Works Department to the Fire Department. II. BACKGROUND • During 2003, the Fire Department continued to be short two shift positions throughout the year. • This shortage of shift positions led to an increase in overtime costs for 2003 and an increase in accrual of leave benefits. • During 2002 the department operated without a union contract. In early 2003, the union contract was settled. Consequently, wage increases as an outcome of the new contract were retroactive to January 1, 2002. Therefore, in February 2003 the retroactive pay was paid out to all union firefighters. • Therefore, after the compilation of the 2003 Revised Budget, the expenditures of the Fire Department have exceeded the appropriation contained in the 2003 02242004Bu dg etAllocAmend Revised Budget, resulting in the department's total 2003 expenditures to exceed appropriations by approximately $192,000. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Charter provides that the City Council must appropriate monies for operations of the City on a departmental level basis. • During the course of the year, the City Council amends the operating budget and it is referred to as the Revised Budget. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • N/A C. FINANCIAL • The amount exceeding budget for the Fire Department is approximately $192,000. • City staff is recommending that the 2003 Revised Budget be allocated between the following departments and divisions in order to balance all City departments: INCREASED BUDGETED EXPENDITURES Fire Fire Division 195 000 Total 195 000 DECREASE BUDGETED EXPENDITURRES Public Works Street Division $195,000 Total 195 000 Net Change to General Fund Budget ~ 0 D. LEGAL • City Charter provides that the City Council must appropriate funds at the department level of spending. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The transfer does not affect the annual General Fund Budget; instead it provides that no department end the fiscal year overspent. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing revision of 2003 budgets of various departments. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REVISION OF 2003 BUDGETS OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS WHEREAS, Resolution No. 9268 appropriated funds for personal services, other services and charges, supplies and capital outlays for each department of the City for the year 2003; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 9407 authorized revision of the 2003 budget various departments; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has requested a revision of the 2003 budget appropriations in accordance with charter provisions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, MN as follows: SUMMARY INCREASEBUDGETEDEXPENDITURES Fire: Fire Division $195,000 Total $195,000 DECREASE BUDGETED EXPENDITURES Public Works: Streets Division $195,000 Total $195, 000 Net Change to General Fund Budget -0- Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of February, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4I REPORT # 3 3 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING u FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: ROBERT r111V TGEN, ACTING UTILITY SUPERINTENDENT NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~i~~t~2~ SIGNAT(/ REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ~I ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: '~, Consideration of purchase for a new Gopher State One Call locating vehicle used by the Utility Division. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the purchase of a new 2004 Ford Explorer from Wick Ford in the sum of $20,919.00 (Price does not include tax or delive char e . II. BACKGROUND Unit 394, a 1997 Ford Aerostat van is fully depreciated and is scheduled to be replaced in 2004. This vehicle also was in an accident on February 3, 2004, and considered a total loss. Purchase of a replacement has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota. Cooperative Purchasing Program. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool equipment. The low bidder for the type of equipment required is then awarded a contract to supply equipment to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY Wick Ford has the state contract on the Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program for Ford Explorers.. The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program B. CRITICAL ISSUES Approval at the February 24, 2004 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new 2004 Ford Explorer. C. FINANCIAL The approved 2004 budget contains $25,000 for this purchase. The Water Division will be paying 100% of the total cost. D. LEGAL • When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. V. ATTACHMENTS None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4x REPORT # 32 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: JAY HENTHORNE, POLICE LIEUTENANT NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~~ J ~td lOt t[' SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a contract for auctioning of forfeited vehicles from Public Safety. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the renewal of the attached auction service contract between the City of Richfield and Auction Broadcasting Company of Minneapolis for auctioning of forfeited vehicles from Public Safetv. II. BACKGROUND The City currently has a contract with the Auction Broadcasting Company, (hereinafter referred to as "ABC") to transport, store, repair, maintain, and sell its Forfeiture Vehicles. "ABC" was awarded the contract for the past year and would like to renew the contract for the year 2004/2005 as the contract expires on April 9, 2004. "ABCs" performance during the contract period was satisfactory. They auction forfeiture vehicles for many cities, including the City of Bloomington. 0224 ABC Forfeiture 1/ehicles Contract Renewal III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • "ABC" notified the City that they wish to renew the contract. • The Public Safety Department wishes to renew the contract with "ABC." • The contract has numerous conditions that must be met. "ABC" is a reputable, established auction company that meets all contract requirements. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • A 30-day written notice must be given by either party to terminate the contract. Public Safety must have a company to store and auction forfeited vehicles on April 9, 2004. Adequate space is not available in the City to store forfeited vehicles. C. FINANCIAL • The current contract with "ABC" reflects rates from 2003/2004. The rates will change in one service offered by "ABC:" a charge of $25 to remove and store personal property from the vehicle, an increase of $10. All other rates remain the same. • Public Safety receives monies from the sale of forfeited vehicles after .appropriate fees are taken out. D. LEGAL • The City attorney has reviewed and approved the past contract with "ABC." IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Do not sign the contract. However, Public Safety would need to find other means to auction forfeited vehicles. V. ATTACHMENTS • ABC contract. Fee Schedule showing rate increased for 2004/2005 in one service area: a charge of $25 to remove and store personal property from the vehicle. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND AUCTION BROADCASTING COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 8th day of April, 2004 by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 6700 Portland Ave. S., Richfield, Minnesota 55423 (hereinafter referred to as the °'City"); and Auction Broadcasting Company Minneapolis, a limited, liability corporation with its principle business offices located at 18270 Territorial Road, Dayton, Minnesota 55369 (hereinafter referred to as "ABC"). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the City comes into possession of and is authorized to retain various motor vehicles which are identified as potentially being subject to forfeiture or other civil processes under the laws of the State of Minnesota as a result of their having been used in the connection with a criminal act (hereinafter referred to as "Forfeiture Vehicles") and upon successful completion of the forfeiture or civil process the City is authorized to dispose of said vehicles in accordance with Section 315 of the Richfield City Code; and WHEREAS, ABC represents that it has the professional expertise and knowledge to perform its duties as an automobile dealer, and is licensed by the State of Minnesota in that capacity; and WHEREAS, the City desires to hire ABC to transport, store, repair, maintain and sell its Forfeiture Vehicles; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed herein, the parties agree as follows: I. TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement shall begin April 9, 2004 and shall continue until April 9, 2005, subject to termination as provided in Article IV. II. DUTIES OF ABC A. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to drive or transport those vehicles identified by the City as one of its Forfeiture Vehicles to a secure location to be determined and managed by ABC. B. Upon receipt of a City Forfeiture Vehicle, ABC accepts full responsibility for it and agrees to exercise due diligence in its care, maintenance and storage of said vehicle until the time that it is sold or released; so as to avoid waste and obtain a reasonable sale price at auction. C. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to perform such minor repair work on the City's Forfeiture Vehicles so as to prepare them for auction and maximize the City's return at auction, but in no event shall such repair work exceed the cost of TWO HUNDRED AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($200.00) without prior, written authorization by the Richfield City Manager or his/her designee. D. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to release the City's Forfeiture Vehicles prior to auction on such terms and conditions as the City may direct. E. ABC agrees to box and store personal property that is not affixed to, but located within, the City's Forfeiture vehicles and upon specific authorization from the City to release such property on such terms and conditions as the City may direct. F. Upon specific authorization from the City, ABC agrees to promptly sell the City's Forfeiture Vehicles in a commercially reasonable manner by an open and competitive automobile dealer or salvage auction. G. ABC agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officials, employees and agents from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from ABC's (including its officials, agents or employees) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of ABC. H. During the term of this Agreement ABC agrees to maintain general comprehensive liability insurance in the amount of $1,000,000 for any damage to property, theft, loss or other claims as a result of ABC's negligence or malfeasance in performing this Agreement. In addition, ABC agrees to maintain such motor vehicle liability insurance as required by state and federal laws. ABC shall be licensed and bonded in the State of Minnesota to perform its duties under this Agreement and shall provide a certificate of licensure, bonding and insurance to the City. J. ABC agrees to comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in the performance of the duties of this Agreement. K. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting ABC's staff as the agents, representatives or employees of the City for any purpose in any manner whatsoever. ABC and its staff are to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. ABC represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of ABC or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by ABC under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the City and shall not be considered employees of the City, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against ABC, its officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the City; and ABC shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers° Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. L. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of the Contractor, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the City, and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 16C.05, Subdivision 5. M. ABC agrees to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. ABC agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from, costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA and/or Section 504 caused by the ABC. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs and activities. The City has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. N. The Contractor will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. 0. Any Forfeiture Vehicles which ABC has been authorized and directed to sell but was unable to under the terms of this Agreement shall be returned to the City at a site designated by it as soon as reasonably practicable but in no event more than sixty (60) days from the occurrence of the event making sale under this Agreement impossible. III. DUTIES OF THE CITY A. The City shall consign specifically identified Forfeiture Vehicles to ABC to sell to the highest bidder at public dealer or salvage auctions. B. The City shall certify that it has good title and right to sell those of its Forfeiture Vehicles which it directs and specifically authorizes ABC to sell at public dealer or salvage auctions and shall provide and deliver merchantable title to the purchaser upon notification from ABC. C. The City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the ABC, its officials, employees and agents, from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the City's performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of City. D. The City shall pay to ABC the following amounts as and for its services properly authorized and provided pursuant to this Agreement: 1. Transportation of an operable Forfeiture Vehicle to or from the City of Richfield to ABC's designated storage site: $35.00. 2. Tow of an inoperable Forfeiture Vehicle (tow or trailer) to or from the City of Richfield to ABC's designated storage site: $85.00. 3. Basic cleaning of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $25.00. 4. Complete detail of a Forfeiture Vehicle (vacuum and shampoo carpets, detail interior, etc.): $85.00. 5. Repair of a Forfeiture Vehicle prior to auction: Shop Rates. 6. Sale by auction of a Forfeiture Vehicle: $110.00. 7. Release of a Forfeiture Vehicle prior to auction: $50.00 redemption fee plus any charges (i.e., transportation). 8. Storage fee if car is not sold within 90 days: $3.00/day. 9. Inventory fee for release of personal property: $25.00. IV. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon thirty (30) days advance written notice to the other party. The City reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in event of default or violation by ABC of any provision of this Agreement. The City may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or desirable to collect damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement. V. MISCELLANEOUS A. Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement and signed by both parties. B. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of the City. C. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between ABC and the City and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. D. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 363. E. The parties hereto agree to .comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973/31 CFR Part 51. This Act states in part that, "...all recipients of federal funds, whether in the form of a grant or a contract, review, and if necessary modify, their programs and activities so that discrimination based on handicap is eliminated." F. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding on ABC's successors and assigns and to the extent any assignee of ABC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. DATED: DATED: CITY OF RICHFIELD BY: Its Mayor BY: Its Manager AUCTION BROADCASTING COMPANY MINNEAPOLIS DATED: BY: Its C @ • ~-~ \ ~ NlK'T10N ~_ ~ - 0 3aonocn~s,vc .~- COMPATiY, tAC FEE SCHEDULE AUCTION SALE FEE - X110.00 Sale fee ,includes the follovving services: • Professional condition report • Complete after sale reporting • Individual folder made for each car kept for min S years • 24 hr security RECONDITIONING SERVICES COMPLETE DETAIL - $85.00 Includes: Hand wash, buff and wax, vacuum and shampoo ed, pets, detail interior, clean windows, power wash engine, clean trunk; Armbrull tires and clean wheel runs. MINI CLEAN - 555.00 Includes :Hand mash, buff and wax, wipe and vacuum interior, clean windotivs, Armorall tires and clean wheel ri»~s. BA.SZC CLEAN - $25.00 Includes: Hand wash, Yacuum interior, clean windows and A~rnorall tires. TRANSPORTA.'TION FOCAL -Any unit that is safe to drive will be picked up by ABC transportation - local rates range from $25.00 to $55.00. Any unit that does not r-zcn qr is unsafe to drive will be towed in; tows average $75.00 to .$85.00. REDEMPTIONS Redemption fee is $50. D0. Paid either by redeemer or by the clie~. Our Redemption hours are as follows:Mondays, YYednesdays, Thursdays 8:30-4:30 ~~-idays 8:30-2:30. Redemptions by appointment only. We do not do redemptions on Tuesdays because it is our sale. PERSONAL .PROPERTY There will be a $25.00 charge for pet sonal property that needs to be removed, inventoried, crud stored. We store personal property for maximz.~rn of 90 days. If personal property is redeemed the customer i.s responsr'ble for the $25.00 charge and then, r't will not be charged to the vehicle. ABC Minneapo Is, LLC. P.O. box 360 18270 Temtori, it Road Osseo, MN 55 369 ~UU[~ JHY 9069fiZfiC9L T~:3 Zi~~ZT fi0 OC%TU AGENDA SECTION: fnn¢ant ('alan~ar AGENDA ITEM # [~ ~ REPORT # ~ I STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY NAME, T/TLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: r ~~~ J ~~ S/GNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution adopting Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Mitigation Plan as Richfield's Emer enc Mana ement Miti ation Plan I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion:. Approve the attached resolution that adopts the Hennepin County Emergency. Preparedness Mitigation Plan as the City of Richfield's Emergency Management Mitigation Plan and authorizing it as a part of the City's Emergency O erations Plan. II. BACKGROUND The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), under the auspices of the Department of Homeland Security, has required the creation of an All-Hazards Mitigation Plan by each jurisdiction throughout the 50 states. This federal requirement was implemented to inspire communities to study preventative measures that will help mitigate disaster events. Due to the size and scope of this project, each county within the State of Minnesota was asked to spearhead this effort on behalf of the municipalities that reside within the counties. Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness formed asub-committee to study this issue and to assist in the development of the comprehensive plan. 0224 Emergency Management Mitigation Plan Hennepin County used the sub-committee's work to write the final plan that is due to FEMA by March 26, 2004. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Emergency Preparedness Plan must be in compliance with the Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Plan. • The Federal government issued a mandate requiring that all 50 states adopt an All-Hazards Mitigation Plan by jurisdiction. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City of Richfield must be compliance with this mandate so that future federal grant monies will not be compromised. • The City of Richfield's Emergency Management Division has a strong working relationship with Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness. It is not uncommon for the two entities to share resources, expertise and planning initiatives. • The City's Emergency Management Coordinator assisted the County with this comprehensive project. By working in concert with Hennepin County, the City benefited in that by adopting this plan as its own, the City will be directly tied into a complex mitigation program that the City would have difficulty supporting on its own. C. FINANCIAL • There is no immediate budget impact. However, by not participating, the City will forfeit grant opportunities. D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Under this federal mandate, no alternative exists without compromising future federal grant monies. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. Memo dated January 21, 2004 from Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness office explaining the plan. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • .None RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY EMEMRGENCY PREPAREDNESS MITIGATION PLAN AS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD'S EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MITIGATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Richfield's Emergency Management Division works in a coordinated fashion with the Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Division for a variety of emergency management services. WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness has agreed to complete a federally mandated All-Hazards Mitigation Plan on behalf of the City of Richfield. WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has required that all municipalities within the United States adopt such a plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The, Richfield City Council ratifies the resolution authorizing the adoption of the Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Mitigation Plan as the City of Richfield's Emergency Management Mitigation Plan. 2. This Plan will become part of the City's Emergency Operations Plan. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day February, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Hennepin County Memo Recycred Public Works Administration Phone: 763-745-7625 Emergency Preparedness Division Fax: 763-478-4001 1600 Prairie Drive TDD: 763-478-4030 Medina MN 55340-5421 DATE: January 21, 2004 TO: Hennepin County Municipal Emergency Managers FROM: Judy Rue, Assistant Director, Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness SUBJECT: Mitigation Plan Enclosed is your copy of the Hennepin County Mitigation Plan. As you may recall, the plan was written to cover all jurisdictions in the County under one plan. Each jurisdiction must then adopt the plan by resolution either as an addendum to the city plan, or as a stand-alone document. The Hennepin County Board will adopt it in eazly March - we have no specific date yet. The Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management has reviewed the document and it meets their requirements. Once. again the timetable is short. Please arrange for this~o be adopted by your agency as soon as possible. Then the plan, with the resolutions, must be submitted to FEMA so that the package is received by March 26, 2004. The Mitigation Plan does not require cities to spend money; it is more of a paradigm shift where the community is viewed with an eye toward prevention or mitigation of disasters. If you have any questions, or need more information for your city council, please call me at 763- 745-7620 or email at Judith.a.rue(a~co.hennepin.mn.us AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4F REPORT # ~ ~ STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER Na,~, TircE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution authorizing the issuance of Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2004. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the refunding of Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1996, with the issuance of Series 2004 Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462C. II. BACKGROUND At the February 10, 2004 City Council meeting, a public hearing was conducted with regards to the Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2004 and a preliminary resolution was approved giving preliminary approval to the refunding of the Series 1996 bonds. As was described at the February 10, 2004 City Council meeting, the Series 1996 bonds in the principal amount of $8,010,000, were issued to refinance ca' ~A Village Shores Apartments, a 166-unit multifamily housing development owned by Market Plaza Housing Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership. The Series 1996 Bonds were issued pursuant to the terms of an Indenture of Trust dated August 1, 1996, between the City and U.S. Bank N.A. as trustee. The proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 1996 Bonds were loaned to the Borrower pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of August 1, 1996 (the "Loan Agreement"), between the City and the Borrower. The Borrower is requesting that the City issue a series of refunding obligations (the "Series 2004 Bonds") the proceeds of which are to be loaned to the Borrower and applied to the redemption and prepayment of the Series 1996 Bonds. As a condition to the consideration of the issuance of such Series 2004 Bonds, the City requires that the Borrower submit an application to the City with respect to the proposed Refunding Bonds. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Under the Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C the City of Richfield has authority to issue revenue bonds. • The Borrower has submitted an Application For Tax Exempt Bond Financing to the City with respect to the proposed Refunding Bonds. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The issuance of these bonds will not count against the City's annual allotment of Bank Qualified Debt. C. FINANCIAL • The amount of the refunding bonds would be $7,610,000. • The bonds will be issued in the City's name, but will not be a charge against the City's general credit or taxing powers. The City will act as a conduit for the financing of the project. It does not create any financial liability to the City. • The City is to be reimbursed and held harmless for and from any out-of-pocket expenses related to the tax exempt financing, including, but not limited to, legal fees, financial analyst fees, bond counsel fees, staff costs, and any deposits or application fees required under state law in order to secure allocation of bonding authority. • The applicant will be charged an annual administrative fee in the amount of ?/8th of 1 % (.125%) of the outstanding. principal balance of the bonds. The approximate amount to be received in 2004 is $9,512. D. LEGAL • Kennedy & Graven will serve as bond counsel for the issue. • A public hearing is required as part of the issuance of private activity revenue bond financing and was held at 6:30 p.m. at the February 10, 2004 City Council Meeting. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Forgo approving the attached resolution and not proceed with the issuance of the private activity revenue bonds. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • John Utley, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered • Representatives from Market Plaza Limited Partnership RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ITS VARIABLE RATE DEMAND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (VILLAGE SHORES APARTMENTS PROJECT), SERIES 2004, IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $7,610,000, WHICH BONDS AND THE INTEREST AND PREMIUM THEREON, IF ANY, SHALL BE PAYABLE SOLELY FROM THE .REVENUES OF THE PROJECT; PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), is a municipal corporation and a home rule city duly organized and existing under its charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, particularly Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Act"), the City is authorized to carry out the public purposes described therein and contemplated thereby in the financing of housing within its boundaries, by issuing revenue bonds to defray, in whole or in part, the development costs of a rental housing development, and by issuing bonds for the purpose of refunding any outstanding bonds issued by the City pursuant to the Act, and by entering into any agreements made in connection therewith and by pledging any such agreements as security for the payment of the principal of and. interest on any such revenue bonds; and WHEREAS, following a public hearing for which notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, Resolution No. 7073 was adopted by the City Council of the City on September 23, 1985, that approved a housing program for the issuance of revenue bonds (the "Program") to finance the construction of a 166-unit multifamily housing development located at 6501 Woodlake Drive in the City (the "Project") pursuant to the Act and gave approval to the issuance of the City's Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds, Series 1985 (Market Plaza Housing Project) (the "Series 1985 Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $8,250,000, dated September 1, 1985; and WHEREAS, the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 1985 Bonds were loaned to Market Plaza Housing Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Owner"), pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated September 1, 1985, between the Owner and the City, and the proceeds of such loan were applied to finance the acquisition, construction, and equipping of the Project; and WHEREAS, following the publication of a notice of public hearing on June 5, 1996, in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, a public hearing was held by the City Council of the City on June 24, 1996, relating to the proposal to issue bonds of the City to refund the Series 1985 Bonds and refinance the Project; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 8354, adopted by the City Council of the City on June 24, 1996, the City authorized the issuance of its Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1996. (Village Shores Project) (the "Series 1996 Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $8,010,000, pursuant to the terms of an Indenture of Trust, dated as of August 1, 1996, between the City and First Trust National Association, a national banking association (now known as U.S. Bank National Association), and loaned the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 1996 Bonds to the Owner pursuant. to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of August 1, 1996, and the proceeds of such loan were applied to the redemption and prepayment of the outstanding principal of the Series 1985 Bonds; and WHEREAS, following the publication of a notice of public hearing on January 22, 2004, in the Sun-Current, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, a public hearing was held by the City Council of the City on February 10, 2004, relating to the proposal to issue bonds of the City to refund the Series 1996 Bonds and refinance the Project, and on such date the City Council of the City adopted a resolution granting preliminary approval to the issuance of such refunding bonds; and WHEREAS, to provide for the redemption and prepayment of the outstanding Series 1996 Bonds, the Owner has proposed that the City issue its Variable Rate Demand Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (Village Shores Apartments Project), Series 2004 (the "Series 2004 Bonds" or the "Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of $7,610,000; and WHEREAS, the Series 2004 Bonds are proposed to be issued pursuant to the terms of a Trust Indenture, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Indenture"), between the City and U.S. Bank National Association, a national banking association, as trustee (the "Trustee"); and WHEREAS the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2004 Bonds will be applied to fund a loan (the "Loan") to the Owner pursuant to the terms of a Financing Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Financing Agreement") between the City, the Owner, and the Trustee, and the proceeds of the Loan will be applied to the redemption and prepayment of the outstanding. principal of the Series 1996 Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Series 2004 Bonds are proposed to be secured by a direct pay Credit Enhancement Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Credit Enhancement Agreement"), between the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, ashareholder-owned government-sponsored enterprise organized and existing under the laws of the United States ("Freddie Mac") and the Trustee; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of a Reimbursement and Security Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Reimbursement Agreement"), to be entered into between Freddie Mac and the Owner, the Owner is obligated to reimburse Freddie Mac for any payments made by Freddie Mac under the Credit Enhancement Agreement; and WHEREAS, to secure the Owner's reimbursement obligations to Freddie Mac under the Reimbursement Agreement, the Owner will execute and deliver to Freddie Mac a Multifamily Mortgage, Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Reimbursement Mortgage"), with respect to the Project; and WHEREAS, the obligations of the Owner under the Loan are to be evidenced by a Multifamily Note, to be dated as of March 1, 2004 or as of the date of issuance of the Bonds (the "Note"), executed by the Owner in favor of the City (and assigned by the City to the Trustee pursuant to the terms of the Indenture for the benefit of the owners of the Series 2004 Bonds); and WHEREAS, the Bonds and the interest thereon are not general or moral obligations of the Issuer but are limited obligations of the Issuer, payable solely from the trust estate expressly pledged to the Bonds under the Indenture, including, without limitation, its interest in the Note, the Financing Agreement, and the Credit Enhancement Agreement, and none of the United States of America, the State of Minnesota, nor any other political subdivision of the State (except the Issuer and ,then only to the limited extent provided in the Indenture) shall in any event be liable for the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds or for the performance of any pledge, obligation, or agreement of any kind whatsoever of the City, and neither the Bonds nor any of the City's agreements or obligations shall be construed to constitute an indebtedness of the United States of America, the State, or any other political subdivision of the State, or the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory provision; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA THAT: Section 1. The City acknowledges, finds, determines, and declares that the preservation of the quality of life in the City is dependent upon the maintenance, provision, and preservation of an adequate 2 housing stock which is affordable to persons and families of low or moderate income and that accomplishing this is a public purpose. The City also hereby finds, determines, and declares that the Project has been designed to be affordable by persons and families of low and moderate incomes and that the Owner has agreed to meet the occupancy limitations and adjusted gross income limitations set forth in Section 103(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder. Section 2. An Amended and Restated Housing Program, dated March 1, 2004 (the "Housing Program"), has been prepared to amend and restate the original Program. The Housing Program reflects the issuance of the Series 2004 Bonds to refund the Series 1996 Bonds and to refinance the Project. The Housing Program, in the form on file with the City, is hereby approved. The City Council of the City further finds, determines, and declares that the purpose of the Housing Program is to finance and refinance the Project. At the request of the Owner, to accomplish the purposes of the Housing Program, the City proposes to issue the Series 2004 Bonds and loan the proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 2004 Bonds to the Owner in order to finance the redemption and prepayment of the Series 1996 Bonds. Section 3. For the purpose of refinancing the Project there is hereby authorized the issuance of the Series 2004 Bonds. The Series 2004 Bonds shall bear interest at such rates, shall be in such denominations, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other details and provisions as are prescribed by the Indenture. The City hereby authorizes the Series 2004 Bonds to be issued as "tax-exempt bonds" the interest on which is not includable in gross income for federal and State of Minnesota income tax purposes. Section 4. The Bonds and the interest thereon are not general or moral obligations of the Issuer. The Bonds and the interest thereon are limited obligations of the Issuer, payable solely from the Trust Estate pledged therefor under this Indenture, including, without limitation, its interest in payments received under the Note and the Credit Enhancement Agreement. The City hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor of the City (the "Mayor") and the City Manager of the City (the "City Manager") to execute the Indenture and to deliver the Indenture to the Trustee and hereby authorizes and directs the execution of the Bonds in accordance with the Indenture, and hereby provides that the Indenture shall provide the terms and conditions, covenants, rights, obligations, duties, and agreements of the bondholders, the City, and the Trustee as set forth therein. The Mayor is hereby authorized to approve changes to the maturity schedules, optional and. mandatory redemption terms, mandatory sinking fund payment schedules, and other terms and provisions of the respective Bonds as set forth in the Indenture; provided that the maturity date for any Bond shall not be later than the latest date set forth in the respective form of the Indenture. All of the provisions of the Indenture, when executed as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be apart of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Indenture shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, and is hereby approved, with such changes as shall be approved by the Mayor pursuant to this section, and with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form and as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Section 5. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby designated as the representatives of the City with respect to the issuance of the Bonds and the transactions related thereto and are hereby authorized and directed to accept and execute the Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement"), between Piper Jaffray & Co. (the "Underwriter"), the City, and the Owner. All of the provisions of the Bond Purchase Agreement, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Bond Purchase Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, and is hereby approved, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Section 6. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Financing Agreement with the Owner, and when executed and delivered as authorized herein, the Financing Agreement shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Financing Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, which is hereby approved, with such necessary variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such forms and as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Section 7. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to accept and execute the Amended and Restated Regulatory Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2004 (the "Regulatory Agreement"), between the City, the Owner, and the Trustee and, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, the Regulatory Agreement shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Regulatory Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, which is hereby approved, with such necessary variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form and as the Mayor, in his discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. Section 8. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to endorse the Note to the Trustee, without recourse, and to execute and deliver the Uniform Commercial Code financing statements (with respect to the assignment of its interests in the Financing Agreement, the Note, and the other Loan documents, other than the Unassigned Rights (as defined in the Indenture), to the Trustee, for the benefit of the owners of the Series 2004 Bonds), and to execute and deliver all other instruments and documents necessary to accomplish the purposes for which the Bonds are to be issued and the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Regulatory Agreement, and the Bond Purchase Agreement are to be executed and delivered. Section 9. The City hereby consents to the preparation and distribution of an Official Statement with respect to the offer and sale of the Series 2004 Bonds (the "Official Statement") as requested by the Underwriter and the Owner; provided that it is understood that the City has not been requested to participate in the preparation of or to review the Official Statement and has not done so. The City has made no independent investigation of the facts and statements set forth in the Official Statement; accordingly, the City assumes no responsibility with respect thereto including, without limitation, as to matters relating to the accuracy, fairness, completeness or sufficiency of the Official Statement, except any information specifically relating to the City under the heading "THE ISSUER" and "NO LITIGATION-The Issuer" in the Official Statement. Section 10. The Mayor, the City Manager, and other officers of the City are authorized upon request to furnish certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers' custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained herein. Such officers, employees, and agents of the City are hereby authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, all other certificates, instruments, and other written documents that may be requested by bond counsel, the Underwriter, the Trustee, Freddie Mac, or other persons or entities in conjunction with the issuance of the Bonds and the expenditure of the proceeds of the Bonds. Without imposing any limitations on the scope of the preceding sentence, such officers and employees are specifically authorized. to execute and deliver a certificate relating to federal tax matters including matters relating to arbitrage and arbitrage rebate, a receipt for the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds, an order to the Trustee, a general 4 certificate of the City, and an Information Return for Tax-Exempt Private Activity Bond Issues, Form 8038 (Rev. January, 2002}. Section 1 1. All covenants, stipulations, obligations, representations, and agreements of the City contained in this resolution or contained in the Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, obligations, representatives, and agreements of the City to the full extent authorized or permitted by law, and all such covenants, stipulations, obligations, representations, and agreements shall be binding upon the City. Except as otherwise provided in this resolution, all rights, powers, and privileges conferred, and duties and liabilities imposed, upon the City by the provisions of this resolution or of the respective Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be exercised or performed by the City, or by such officers, board, body, or agency as may be required or authorized by law to exercise such powers and to perform such duties. No covenant, stipulation, obligation, representation, or agreement herein contained or contained in the Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation, representation, or agreement of any elected official, officer, agent, or employee of the City in that person's individual capacity, and neither the members of the City Council of the City nor any officer or employee executing the Bonds shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. Section 12. Except as herein otherwise expressly provided, nothing in this resolution or in the Indenture, expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon any person, firm, or corporation other than the City, and the Trustee, as fiduciary for owners of the Bonds, any right, remedy, or claim, legal or equitable, under and by reason of this resolution or any provision hereof or of the Indenture or any provision thereof; this resolution, the Indenture and all of their provisions being intended to be, and being for the sole and exclusive benefit of the City and the Trustee as fiduciary for owners of the Bonds issued under the provisions of this resolution and the Indenture, and the Owner to the extent expressly provided in the Indenture. Section 13. In case any one or more of the provisions of this resolution, or of the documents mentioned herein, or of the Bonds issued hereunder shall for any reason be held to be illegal or invalid, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this resolution, or of the aforementioned documents, or of the Bonds, but this resolution, the aforementioned documents, and the Bonds shall be construed and endorsed as if such illegal or invalid provisions had not been contained therein. The terms and conditions set forth in the Indenture, the pledge of revenues derived from the Project referred to in the Indenture, the pledge of collateral derived from the Project referred to in the Indenture, the creation of the funds provided for in the Indenture, the provisions relating to the application of the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds pursuant to and under the Indenture, and the application of said revenues, collateral, and other money are all commitments, obligations, and agreements on the part of the City contained in the Indenture, and the invalidity of the Indenture shall not affect the commitments, obligations, and agreements on the part of the City to create such funds and to apply said revenues, other money, and proceeds of the Bonds for the purposes, in the manner, and according to the terms and conditions fixed in the Indenture, it being the intention hereof that such commitments on the part of the City are as binding as if contained in this resolution separate and apart from the Indenture. Section 14. All acts, conditions, and things required by the laws of the State of Minnesota, relating to the adoption of this resolution, to the issuance of the Bonds, and to the execution of the Indenture and the other documents referred to above to happen, exist, and be performed precedent to and in the enactment of this resolution, and precedent to the issuance of the Bonds, and precedent to the execution of the Indenture and the other documents referred to above have happened, exist, and have been performed as so required by law. Section 15. The members of the City Council of the City, officers of the City, and attorneys and other agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized to do all acts and things required by them by or in connection with this resolution and the Indenture and the other documents referred to above for the full, punctual, and complete performance of all the terms, covenants, and agreements contained in the Bonds, the Indenture, and the other documents referred to above, and this resolution. Section 16. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby designated and authorized to take such administrative actions as are permitted or required in connection with the issuance of the Bonds and pursuant to the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Regulatory Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement. Section 17. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all certificates, agreements or other documents which are required by the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Regulatory Agreement or any other agreements, certificates or documents which are deemed necessary by bond counsel to evidence the validity or enforceability of the Bonds, the Indenture or the other documents referred to in this resolution, or to evidence compliance with Section 103(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue. Code of 1954, as amended, and applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, and Section 103 and applicable provisions of Sections 141-150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder; and all such agreements or representations when made shall be deemed to be agreements or representations, as the case may be, of the City. Section 18. If for any reason the Mayor of the City is unable to execute and deliver those documents referred to in this Resolution, any other member of the City Council of the City, or any officer of the City duly delegated to act on behalf of the Mayor, may execute and deliver such documents with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed by the Mayor. If for any reason the City Manager of the City is unable to execute and deliver the documents referred to in this Resolution, such documents may be executed and delivered by any member of the City Council, the Assistant City Manager, or any officer of the City duly delegated to act on behalf of the City Manager, with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed and delivered by the City Manager. Section 19. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. PASSED AND APPROVED this February 24, 2004. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Martin J. Kirsch ,Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk RC145-517 (JU) 244085v.1 6 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4 E REPORT # 2 9 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STEVEN L. DEVICH ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution establishing a car allowance reimbursement policy. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution establishing a car allowance reimbursement policy. III. BACKGROUND ~ The City of Richfield has had along-standing practice of not providing City vehicles to most City employees. The only exceptions to the policy are the Fire Chief and the Assistant Fire Chief/Fire Marshall. Instead of providing vehicles, employees are required to use their personal vehicles for the routine performance of their official duties. Twelve City employees, including the City Manager, Department Directors, Building Inspectors and the Operations Superintendent, are provided with a monthly car allowance. This car allowance is intended to reimburse these individuals for all costs associated with the use of their personal autos for conducting City business, including travel to metropolitan area meetings, conferences and schools. 0224carallowance ~~ While this has been a long standing administrative practice built into the annual budget; the City Attorney has suggested that the practice be formalized by a City resolution. In the future, this resolution will be incorporated into the resolution section of the annual budget. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Attorney has suggested that the car allowance policy be formalized with a City Council resolution, emphasizing that this payment is intended to fully reimburse the employees for the reasonable costs of using their personal autos for City business. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • While there is no critical timeline for passing this resolution, it should be done now to establish the policy by resolution. C. FINANCIAL • There is no additional cost to the City to formalize this practice/policy by City resolution. D. LEGAL • There is no legal requirement to pass such a resolution. However, the resolution formalizes the policy and clarifies that it is intended to serve as a form of reimbursement for incurred auto expenses. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The City Council could decide not to adopt the attached resolution. V. ATTACI-IlVIENTS • Resolution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A CAR ALLOWANCE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY WHEREAS, the City Counci{ has determined not to provide certain employees with a City vehicle for the performance of the employee's official City duties, and WHEREAS, said employees are required to use their own personal vehicle in the performance of their official duties, and WHEREAS, such employees are responsible for the fuel, maintenance, insurance and all other expenses required for the upkeep of their personal vehicles, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to establish a policy to provide such employees with a car allowance reimbursement; and WHEREAS, the car allowance is an estimated amount intended to reimburse such employees for the reasonable expenses that they will incur in the performance of their official duties, and WHEREAS, the car allowance reimbursement represents the City's full obligation and responsibility regarding the provision of automobile transportation to such employees. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield hereby adopts the following car allowance reimbursement schedule: City Manager $400/month Public Safety Director $375/month Other Department Directors $225/month Building Inspectors $225/month Operations Superintendent $225/month Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of February, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4D REPORT # 2 g STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: STEVEN L. DEVICH ADMII~TISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the attached resolution regarding appointments to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution reappointing Robyn Goolsbey, Rudy Hanuman and Rhonda Osborne to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for three-year terms ending December 31, 2006. III. BACKGROUND On June 25, 1990 the City Council approved an ordinance to levy. a 3% tax on gross receipts of lodging from Richfield Hotels and Motels pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. The establishment of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. (RTPB) and the appointment of directors were also a part of the resolution. Currently there are five director positions on the Board. The term of each appointment is for three years and terms are staggered to maintain Board continuity. The current appointments to the RTPB and the ending dates of their terms are as follows: 0224tourism L~ I/]~J 8~ 1. Russ Susag, representing the Richfield Chamber of Commerce, term ending December 31, 2005. 2. Rudy Hanuman, General Manager of Candlewood Suites, term ending December 31, 2003. 3. Rhonda Osborne General Manager of Americlnn, term ending December 31, 2003. 4. Robyn Goolsbey, Hampton Inn, term ending December 31, 2003. 5. Jerod Endersbe, General Manager of Motel 6, December 31, 2004. The terms of three members of the RTPB expired on December 31, 2003. Those members are Robyn Goolsbey, Rudy Hanuman and Rhonda Osborne. Each of them retains their position with their respective hotel/motel property and wishes. to be reappointed to the RTPB. Each of the expiring members has been an active and vital part of the RTPB in the past and deserves consideration for reappointment: III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council has the authority to make appointments to the RTPB. • The RTPB has typically included a representative from each property. • Mr. Hanuman, Ms. Goolsbey and Ms. Osborne are the General Managers of their respective hotel/motel properties and are interested in reappointment to the RTPB. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Although each member serves until a successor is appointed, each of their terms expired on December 31, 2003 and reappointments should be made as soon as .possible: C. FINANCIAL • There is no cost to the City. D. LEGAL • The appointment conforms to City ordinance and bylaws of the RTPB. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • The City Council could decide not to appoint these members to the RTPB: • The City Council could choose to review this matter at a future date. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resoution. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING REPRESENTATIVES TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE RICHFIELD TOURISM PROMOTION BOARD, INC. WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has levied a 3% tax on the gross receipts of lodging from hotels and motels in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 169.190; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute Section 169.190 authorizes the proceeds of the tax to fund a Tourism Promotion Board for the .purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center; and WHEREAS, the articles and bylaws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, Inc. provide the City Council of the City of Richfield appoint five (5) directors to the Board representing the Richfield hotel-motel properties and the Richfield Chamber of Commerce; and WHEREAS, each director shall serve as a director until his or her successor has been. appointed and has qualified, or until his or her earlier disqualification, death, resignation, or removal; and WHEREAS, the term of Rudy Hanuman, representative from the Candlewood Suites, has expired and he seeks reappointment; and WHEREAS, the term of Robyn Goolsbey, representative from the Hampton Inn, has expired and she seeks reappointment, and WHEREAS, the term of Rhonda Osborne, representative from the Americlnn.,has expired and she seeks reappointment. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board directors be modified as follows: Reappoint Rudy Hanuman, Candlewood Suites, to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for athree-year term ending December 31, 2006. Reappoint Robyn Goolsbey, Hampton Inn, to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for athree-year term ending December 31, 2006. Reappoint Rhonda Osborne, Americlnn, to the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for athree-year term ending December 31, 2006. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th. day of February, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # 4.C REPORT # ~ 7 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: CHRIS REGIS, FINANCE MANAGER NAME; TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of the attached transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund. ~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ~~ By Motion: Approve first reading of the attached transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements and schedule public hearing and. second reading hearing for March 23, 2004. III. BACKGROUND ~ • At the December 9, 2003 City Council meeting, the City Council authorized $500,000 of Special Revenue Funds for improvements to several City recreation. capital improvements and City Hall repairs in 2004. • Included in the $500,000 are: • $50,000 for major park maintenance projects • $50,000 for Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment • $55,000 for Ice Arena Ceiling Beams • $214,000 for the first repayment for the outdoor pool renovation internal loan • $131,000 for City Hall repairs/maintenance 040224 Transitory Ord ~~ • In addition, the 2004 Capital Improvement Budget also provides for expenditures for all types of funds contained in the budget including municipal state aid, user fees, federal grants and state grants. • Authorization by ordinance is not required for expenditures other than Special Revenues. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Charter Section 7.12, Subd. 2 requires that Special Revenue Funds used for capital improvements must be authorized by ordinance. • This process provides for public input through a public hearing. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. • The ordinance requirements must be completed early enough in 2004 so that the capital projects can be initiated on a timely basis, completed and the funds expended. • In order for the timely start of the projects under consideration in the Capital Improvement Budget, it is suggested that the first reading of the transitory ordinance take place on February 24 and a public hearing and second reading be completed at the March 23, 2004 City Council meeting. C. FINANCIAL • While the total 2004 Capital Improvements Budget (CIB) includes total budgeted expenditures of $9,773,500 the portion of CIB concerning proposed funding from the Special Revenue fund is $500,000. Park Maintenance 50,000 Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment 50,000 Ice Arena Ceiling Beams 55,000 Outdoor Pool Renovation 214,000 City Hall Repair/Maintenance 131,000 • A transitory ordinance is necessary to finalize these appropriations pursuant to City Charter. • The source of Special Revenue funds is municipal liquor profits. D. LEGAL • The City Charter requires that a transitory ordinance be used to authorize the expenditure of Special Revenue funds. ~ IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ ~ The City Council could postpone the first reading of the transitory ordinance to a future City Council meeting. The City Council could decide to authorize none or only a portion of the expenditures identified from special revenue in the CIB. V. ATTACHMENTS • An ordinance providing for the expenditure of money from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Park Maintenance $ 50,000 Ice Arena Second Sheet Loan Repayment $ 50,000 Ice Arena Ceiling Beams $ 55,000 Outdoor Pool Renovation $ 214,000 City Hall Repair/Maintenance $ 131,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 24th day of February, 2004 Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar AGENDA ITEM # L~R REPORT # ~.c STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ''~ ~ ~' FEBRUARY 24, -2004 REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE SYLVESTER, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: NAM/:, T!Tlls DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of attached resolution declaring the adequacy of petition for vacation of a drainage and utility easement, conducting a first reading of a Transitory Ordinance to vacate a drainage and utility easement, and calling for a public hearing and second reading to consider the request to vacate a drainage and utility easement located at 6300 Penn Avenue. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring the adequacy of petition for vacation of a public easement; By Motion: Conduct a first reading of a Transitory Ordinance to vacate a public easement; and call for a public hearing and second reading on March 23, 2004 to consider the request to vacate a public easement located at 6300 Penn Avenue. II. BACKGROUND • The 60-foot wide right-of-way for the 6300 block of Queen Avenue (located to the east of Fraser School and to the west of Penn Avenue) was vacated in the early 1990x. The land underlying the right-of-way accrued to the adjoining properties, and a private driveway was created to serve these properties. 022403-Vacate Ease ment. d oc When the public right-of-way was vacated, a 60-foot wide drainage and utility easement was created over the area that had been public right-of-way. • Because half of the right-of-way accrued to the adjoining property owners, the property at 6300 Penn Avenue acquired 30 additional feet of land; so that it's western property line moved further west 30 feet. (Instead of the eastern line of the right-of-way being the western edge of the property at 6300 Penn, the current western edge of the property is 30 feet further to the west, at what used to be the centerline of Queen Avenue...) • Aldi, Inc. purchased the property at 6300 Penn Avenue and has received City Council approval for the construction of a new building at this site. The proposed building meets all city requirements, including locating the proposed building so that it is set-back 20 feet from the rear (western) property line. • Because the proposed building at 6300 Penn Avenue will be set-back the required 20 feet from the western property line, the existence of a 30 foot drainage and utility easement along the western 30 feet of the property at 6300 Penn Avenue causes the proposed building to overlap the drainage and utility easement by 10 feet. • The applicant has requested that the eastern 10 feet of the drainage and utility easement be vacated, so that 20 feet of the easement remain and so the building will not encroach upon the easement area. • Staff have reviewed both the public and private utilities in the area and determined that only an electrical line exists in the area. The request can be approved while still accommodating the electrical line and any future needs for either public or private utilities. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY Richfield City Charter Section 13.05 specifies procedures for the City Council to vacate a street, alley or "part thereof', including a drainage and utility easement. • Richfield City Code Section 820.05 states that the Council "shall by resolution acknowledge receipt of any petition. The Council shall also set the date for a public hearing on any proposed street vacation. No vacation may be made unless it appears in the interest of the public to do so. Not less than ten days prior to the public hearing, a notice shall be published once in the official newspaper and sent by mailed notice to the owner and residents." B. CRITICAL ISSUES The proposed redevelopment of this site has already been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. During title research, the applicant discovered the existence of this easement and has requested that it be vacated so that their proposed building can be constructed as already approved by the City Council. • City staff has reviewed the area of the easement to be vacated and determined that there are no private nor public utilities in the area, and that no utilities are planned in the area. • The drainage and utility easement currently covers the rear 30 feet of the applicant's property. Only 10 feet will be vacated, while 20 feet along the property line will still remain under the drainage and utility easement. While staff does not anticipate any utilities becoming necessary in the area, 20 feet of the applicant's property will still remain available if any utilities must be provided on or over the property. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL In order to be determined adequate, the petition must be signed by the owners of half of the land abutting on the right-of-way to be vacated. Richfield City Code subsection 820.03. This requirement is met. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • N/A V. ATTACHMENTS • City Council Resolution finding the petition to be adequate • DRAFT Transitory Ordinance vacating the drainage and utility easement • Attachment `A'-certificate of survey showing easement to be vacated VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • A representative for the applicant will be in attendance at the March 23 public hearing and second reading for the transitory ordinance vacating a portion of the drainage and utility easement. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (Document Number 2756159) AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT (Document Number 2756159) WHEREAS, the City has received a petition for the vacation of a portion of a drainage and utility easement (Document Number 2756159); and WHEREAS, Richfield City Code Subsection 820.03 requires that a petition for vacation of a street, alley, or part thereof be signed by the owners of at least half of the land abutting the street or alley or part thereof to be vacated; and WHEREAS, There is one property that abuts the drainage and utility easement. The owner of this parcel has signed the petition for vacation of a portion of the drainage and utility easement. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: A certain petition requesting the vacation of a portion of the drainage and utility easement (Document Number 2756159), filed with the city on February 3, 2004, is declared to be signed by the owners of the required percentage of property affected thereby. This declaration is made in conformity with Richfield City Code Subsection 820.03. 2. A public hearing on the proposed easement vacation is scheduled for March 23, 2004. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of the public hearing in the City's official newspaper once not less than ten days prior to the public hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this February 24th, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk DRAFT BILL NO. DRAFT TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING A .PORTION OF THE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT CREATED IN DOCUMENT NUMBER 2756159 (Formerly the 6300 block of Queen Avenue South, Richfield) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: The following described lands are subject to a drainage and utility easement as created in Document Number 2756159 ("Drainage and Utility Easement"): The West 30 feet of the East 330 feet of the South '/z of the East 3/8 of the East '/z of the North 'h of the Northeast'/4 of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24; EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof AND The West 30 feet of the East 360 feet of the East 3/8 of the East '/Z of the North '/z of the Northeast %4 of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24 lying south of the North 175 feet thereof, EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof. Sec. 2: The City of Richfield has received a petition for the vacation of the following described portion of the "Drainage and Utility Easement" ("Vacation Area"): The East 10 feet of the West 30 feet of the East 330 feet of the South '/z of the East 3/8 of the East'/2 of the North'/z of the Northeast'/4 of Section 29, Township 28, Range 24; EXCEPT the south 33 feet thereof. Section 3: The City Council has determined the petition to vacate the "Vacation Area" of the "Drainage and Utility Easement" to be adequate by Resolution No. Sec. 4: There are no City-owned water or sewer facilities located within the Vacation Area. Sec. 5: The City has notified the service providers for gas, electric, telephone, and cable communications services of the proposed vacation, and there are no utilities located within the Vacation Area. Overhead electric power lines do exist in the Drainage and Utility Easement area but will not be affected by the requested vacation. Sec. 6: The Council finds that there is no need for a drainage and utility easement in the Vacation Area. Sec. 7: The drainage and utility easement over the Vacation Area is vacated. Sec. 8: The vacation of the drainage and utility easement is effective 30 days following publication of this ordinance. The City Clerk is directed to prepare a certificate of completion of vacation proceedings and to record the vacation in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles or Hennepin County Recorder, as appropriate. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this March 23rd, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk 022403-VacateEasement. doc ATTACHMENT 'A'f~ '""""'~'" ""' ' ` ~ ~ dA H013~IS N011 d0 a ~ ~ vtas~r+tN ~ai3i~pia ~ ,».,~...» ~ ~ ~ ~ - 'ONI IOIb' ~ ; R Q `~ Z U `~ 0 I~ U ~ W ~I11 ~ ~O ~ W Q ~ ~g~ ~ ~ U~ 4 UZ r u u • a t ~ ~ .. O ~' ~ H vr_ ~c°$ $ o~~ b T D € M O W 00 » "~z L Q p V y $ N» N 3f1N3Atl NN3d ~ ~ y - •~ V .~ W «'S - ~ N N ~~ E ~ y. rn R ~.a Z ~~ $o ~ "y.¢ _? ~ _ N ~ Z U ~ N O O O N m ~ I~ ~~ f. WF- .L. 00 SN O C~ ~y urS O c ~ ,a --- ti ~Z ,~ Z~€ o~ ~ o Q- a ~, ~Z~ o~ xe ~ vN a ol- i =~ ° ` NFU ell ~~~ ~ .Ly.Z 3~N O Z ~$ °y N ~ ~M V Z yn ~go 0 $aE~, oWUS a~ m cQ .~T o ~\wM paapCC ` 8 (jam; V O~ F O 1' ~ ~ to Z V1 ` O r W L_ L L ~pV 01 ~ ~ 7 d i ~In2 sQi 'n v i~ O ~ O n „ y O r ~. ~ ~~ ~y •~ T ua TO '~S-O r gr: _ a.... M N , O Z W 1 ~ 0 _~ U M N Y i ~ ~ a o ~~ ~~ Z aa~~ - - ~ \ esnus •x =o tee) f -~ . `--~a.amas Sxnn ow .eewq,os-, L- ---------- ----------------- ~ -- 3Ntll 3AILI0 ----------~--------------- ` ---------------~ --Yi----------------- ~~'------------------~-------- // II I 4~ ~\ . . o y •e °o //~I c ~ _ ` g g a N ~~ ; N I ado ~E--N 3 ~ ~,°~'€N ~~ r ~ ~ ~y g ~ ~ ~ ~ c 8' N meaz ( 4 v ~ m _ 3$ p a• Fb( ~ ~ dl g' i u~ # ~ X ~ g > ~ ~~ ~ g ~ ~ { ~ bl '~" l% t 4 ~ J Q ~z° ~ ? ~„ ~ ~ ~ ~~ j y $ !' W ~~ ~ C d N 6 ? ~x Wy W~y y < 7 ~ aS V 6 6 3 ~J ~. a~ ~ ~ ti ~ S y ` y / i O F x ~ , ~ ................ .o~o~o~a~~~~~~~,~~o ~ ~~1 ... I1111f x ~v - ~ ~ I I it III e•out-o.so-Me.t\w\n-eroKOx\ay pn\s rrasix ron Y. a.r ®® rv°~=~~~~ STAFF REPORT ~~, AGENDA SECTION AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 24, 2004 CONSENT CALENDAR 4A 25 REPORT PREPARED BY: BRUCE SYLVESTER, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR NAME, TITLE COUNCIL PRESENTER: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: S/GNATURIs' REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of first reading of amendments to Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506 and 526 and the Richfield City Code Section 920 to create regulations for firearms related uses. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Conduct a first reading of the attached ordinance amendments to Richfield Zoning Code Section 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 and to the Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7 and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b) to create regulations for firearms related uses and schedule public hearing and second reading for March 23, 2004. III. BACKGROUND I A Richfield resident requested zoning requirements for locating a firearms safety training center at 6611 Chicago Avenue in June of 2003. After reviewing current land-use rules, staff determined that no zoning regulations existed for such a use in Richfield. Zoning Code Section 511.05 states that uses not listed in the Zoning Code are to be referred to the City Council for consideration. On July 8, 2003 the City Council voted to classify any use involving the discharge of a firearm as a `firearms related use' and to limit such uses to the C-2 or I districts within the City. The Council further directed the Planning Commission and Public Safety 022404-1 stRead-Firearms.doc department to work together to draft suggested zoning regulations for such uses. The City Council also enacted a moratorium on such uses until after regulations could be drafted and adopted. This land-use moratorium took effect on July 8, 2003 and will expire on July 31, 2004 unless it is extended by the City Council prior to the expiration date. Staff began studying firearms related use regulations from other communities in Minnesota and around the country. In addition to regulating the location of such uses, staff discovered that most communities also regulate a wide variety of aspects related to the management of businesses that involve firearms. Community Development Department staff met with staff from the Public Safety Department and Motor Vehicle Licensing Division and both agreed that in addition to zoning and land-use regulations, business management and licensing regulations should also be drafted for the City Council to adopt. The Planning Commission conducted a Worksession on September 8, 2003 to review staff research and recommendations for possible zoning regulations for firearms related uses. Richfield Police Sergeant, Mike Koob participated in the discussion. The Richfield resident who originally requested zoning information for a firearms safety training center on Chicago Avenue was invited to the work session but did not attend. Using staff research, the Planning Commission developed recommended zoning regulations for firearms related-uses. These recommendations are included in the attached ordinance providing amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinances. Community Development staff has also worked with the Motor Vehicle Licensing Division to create licensing requirements for firearms-related land uses. These recommended licensing requirements are also included in the attached ordinance providing amendments to the City's Ordinances. Summary of recommended land-use regulations and licensing requirements. The recommended revisions to the City's Zoning Code and Public Safety and licensing requirements can be summarized as follows: Zoning a) Firearms related uses are defined and then included with the existing zoning regulations for gun and ammunition sales/repair uses. This change requires firearms related uses to obtain a city license; to be located at least 300 feet from schools, churches, daycare centers, public libraries, or governmental buildings; to be located at least 1,000 feet from other gun or ammunition sales/repair businesses or firearms-related uses; and, to be located at least 100 feet from any residentially zoned property. b) Additional zoning requirements are added specifically for firearms-related uses above and beyond those outlined above for both gun and ammunition sales/repair and firearms related uses. These additional requirements specific to firearms related uses include: hours of operation are limited to between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.; firearms related uses must be operated in buildings that meet minimum standards, including a prohibition against operating such uses in trailers or other non-permanent structures; and exempting firearms related uses that exist on or before January 1, 2004. Public Safer and Licensing a) The licensing section of the City Code is modified so a city license is required for firearms related uses, as is already required for firearms manufacturers and dealers. b) Conditions required to issue a license for firearms related uses are created, including the requirement that the licensee must be at least 21 years of age. c) The section listing the exemptions to the prohibition against discharging a firearm in the city is modified to include the lawful discharge of weapons at licensed firearms-related uses that comply with the City's zoning requirements. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council referred this issue to the Planning Commission for study and a recommendation on July 8, 2003. • The recommended ordinance amendment will create a definition for firearms-related uses and provide zoning regulations and licensing requirements for such uses in the C-2 and I zoning districts. • In addition to requiring changes to the City's Zoning Code, changes to Chapter IX, Public Safety, of the City's Ordinances are also required. ' These changes are provided here for consideration and adoption as well. • The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance amendments at its January 26, 2004 meeting and recommended that the amendments be approved by the City Council. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Regulations for firearms related uses are necessary to provide reasonable controls for such uses to insure public health, safety, and welfare. • The Director of Public Safety has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's code. • The City Attorney has reviewed and approved these proposed amendments to the City's code. • The amended ordinances should be adopted and published 30 days before the moratorium expires on July 31, 2004 or the moratorium will need to be extended. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL Zoning: This ordinance amendment creates land-use controls for firearms related uses in the C-2 and I zoning districts. Land Use: Firearms related land-uses. Comprehensive Plan: N/A Notification: Notification for the City Council public hearing on this proposed Zoning Code amendment will be provided as required by State Statute and City requirements. Other Actions: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments at its January 26, 2004 meeting. If approved by the Council at this first reading, a second reading and public hearing will be scheduled for March 23, 2004. If the City Council adopts the recommended changes, they will take effect 30 days after the approved Council resolution is posted in the Sun Current newspaper. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Reject the motion to amend Richfield Zoning Code Sections 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 to create zoning regulations for firearms related uses and to amend Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7, and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b) to create public safety and licensing requirements for firearms related uses. ~ V. ATTACHMENTS rences: Draft of proposed amendments to Zoning Code Sections 506.07 Subdivision 32 and 526.27 Subdivision 19 and Richfield City Code Sections 920.01 Subdivision 4; 920.03 Subdivisions 1, 7, and 8; and 920.11 Subdivision 4(b). VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Persons interested in zoning and land-use regulations. BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE SECTION 506.07, SUBDIVISION 32; SECTION 526.27, SUBDIVISION 19; SECTION 920.01, SUBDIVISION 4; SECTION 920.03 SUBDIVISIONS 1, 7, and (new) 8; AND SECTION 920.11 SUBDIVISION 4(b) THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 506.07, Subdivision 32 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 506.07, Subdivision 32 "Firearms-Related Uses"-uses operated by a private person or entity that involve the discharge of a firearm, including but not limited to shooting galleries, firing ranges, and fire-arms safety training centers. 2. Section 506.07 is amended so all subdivisions, starting with "Floor Area, Gross", are renumbered by increasing their subdivision number by one (1). 3. Section 526.27, Subdivision 19 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 526.27, Subdivision 19. Gun or ammunition sales/repair and firearms-related uses, provided the following conditions are met: a) such uses shall be licensed under Section 920 of the City Code; b) such uses shall be located not less than 300 feet from any school; Church, daycare center, public library, or government building; c) such uses shall be located not less than 1,000 feet from other gun or ammunition sales/repair businesses or firearms related uses; a~ d) such uses shall be located not less than 100 feet from residentially zoned property; e) firearms-related uses shall not operate before 8:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m., f) firearms-related uses shall only be allowed within an enclosed structure which is soundproofed toprevent the sound to be heard by persons on adjoining~ropertyl g) no firearms-related use shall be allowed in a trailer or other non- permanent building; and h) any firing-range existing in the city on or prior to January 1, 2004 shall be allowed to continue. 4. Section 920.01, Subdivision 4 is of the code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: 920.01, Subdivision 4. "Firearms-Related Uses"-means uses operated by a private person or entity that involve the discharge of a firearm, including but not limited to shooting_galleries, firing ranges, and fire-arms safety training centers. 5. Section 920.03, Subdivision. 1 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.03, Subdivision 1. License required. A manufacturer or dealer may not sell at wholesale or retail, or lease, pledge or accept as security for a loan a firearm without first having procured a license as specified below under Subdivision 7. An operator of afirearms-related use may not operate any firearms-related use without first having_procured alicense as specified below under Subdivision 8. 6. Section 920.03, Subdivision 7 of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.03, Subdivision 7. Conditions Governing Issuance for firearms manufacturers or dealers. The following conditions govern issuance of a license for firearms manufacturers or dealers pursuant to this subsection: [items a) through f) under 920.03, Subdivision 7 remain unchanged...] 7. Section 920.03, Subdivision 8 of the code of the City of Richfield is created to read as follows: 920.03, Subdivision 8. Conditions Governing Issuance for operators of firearms- related uses. The following conditions govern issuance of a license for operators of firearms-related uses. a) All licensees must be at least 21 years of age; b) No person may, in applying for a license to operate afirearms-related use. give false identification or offer false evidence of his identity 8. Section 920.11, Subdivision 4 (b) of the code of the City of Richfield is amended to read as follows: 920.11, Subdivision 4(b). persons engaged in target shooting at inanimate objects at afirearms-related use that is licensed under this section and complies with the requirements of section 526.27, Subdivision 19 of this code. ~^~~+"~^ ~^ ^^^'^°^~' Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd day of March, 2004. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk