11-23-04 AGENDACITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2004
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6700 PORTLAND AVENUE
5:30 P.M.
Call to order
Roll call
1. Discussion with Isaiah representatives regarding immigration ordinance
Notes:
2. Update regarding Metropolitan Airports Commission's action on Part 150 Noise
Insulation Program and discussion of future strategies
Notes:
Adjournment
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
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 opporturnty to address the Council on items not on the agenda.
Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Notes:
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of minutes of (1) Special City Council Worksession of November 9, 2004 and (2)
Regular City Council Meeting of November 9, 2004
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
1. Council discussion
Hats Off To Hometown Hits
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 resolution regarding Signal Agreement No. 87338M
among City:of Richfield, Hennepin County and Minnesota Department of
Transportation for maintenance of new traffic signals and street lights at 66th Street
and Highway 77 east and west ramps S.R. No. 189
B. Consideration of approval of resolution designating City's contribution toward health,
term life and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management
employees S.R. No. 190
C. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing amendments to City's Flexible
Spending Account Plan benefit S.R. No. 191
D. Consideration of approval of canceling December 28, 2004 Regular City Council
Meeting S.R. No. 192
E. Consideration of .approval of new 2004 on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor
licenses, including outside service of alcohol and food, for The Noodle Shop -
Colorado, Inc. dba Noodles and Company, 7630 Lyndale Avenue S.R. No. 193
F. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing on December 14, 2004 for
renewal of on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for 2005 for Red
Pepper Chinese Restaurant, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Pu'hket Thai Restaurant ;
Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC dba Chipotle Mexican Grill; and The Noodle
Shop-Colorado Inc. dba Noodles and Company S.R. No. 194
G. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing for December 14, 2004 for
renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for 2005 for MDM EAR
dba Backyard Bar and Grill; Khan's Mongolian Barbeque; Minneapolis-Richfield
American Legion Post 435; Fred Babcock VFW Post No. 5555 dba Four Nickels
Food and Drink; Don Pablo's Operating Corporation dba Don Pablo's; Champps
Operating Corporation dba Champps Sports Cafe; Wiltshire Restaurants, LLC dba
Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar; The Frenchman's; Taco Morelos; and LaVilla
Restaurante Mexicano S.R. No. 195
H. Consideration of approval of scheduling public hearing on December 14, 2004 for
renewal of pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses for 2005 for Metro
Pawn and Gun, Inc. and Capital Cash, LLC dba Hy's Pawn S.R. No. 196
I. Consideration of approval of award of contract to Cutler-Magner Company for quick
lime for water treatment in amount of $203,644 for 2005 and 2006 with option to
r~ renew for another two years S.R. No. 197
V ` J. Consideration of approval of award of contract to Malecha Trucking for lime by-
productdisposal in amount of $196,020 for 2005 and 2006 with option to renew for
another two years S.R. No. 198
Notes:
5. Consideration of item(s), if any, removed from Consent Calendar
Notes:
RESOLUTION
6. Consideration of resolution requesting Minnesota Department of Transportation conduct
speed study along 76th Street between I-35W northbound ramp and Penn Avenue to
adjust speed limit
Staff Report No. 199
Notes:
~'
OTHER BUSINESS
7. Consideration of agreement between cities of Richfield and Minneapolis regarding
Metropolitan Airports Commission noise mitigation program
Notes:
8. Claims and payrolls
Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by
majority vote of the City Council)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for
others. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the
agenda. Individuals who wish fo address the Council must have registered prior to the
meeting. '
Notes:
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.
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
RESOLUTION
6
199
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL, GOAL(S) No. N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
aND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 39
KRISTIN ASHER, PROJECT ENGINEER
NAME, TITLL'
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR ~ ~ ~,~
REVIEW: /I
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER.
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of resolution requesting that Mn/DOT conduct a speed study along 76th Street
between the I-35W NB Ram and Penn Avenue to ad~ust the s eed limit.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution which requests that
Mn/DOT conduct a speed study along 76th Street between the I-35W
NB Ramp and Penn Avenue to adjust the speed limit.
II. BACKGROUND
The Richfield Traffic Control Committee received a request to investigate increasing
the speed limit along 76th Street from the I-35W Northbound Ramp to Penn
Avenue. This portion of 76th Street has been reconstructed and widened to include
raised medians and left-turn lanes into the Best Buy Campus and surrounding
areas.
1123SPEEDRESOLUTION
Presently, the speed limit is posted at 30 miles per hour (mph). The Minnesota
Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) holds the authority to set speed limits on all
roads in Minnesota. In order for Mn/DOT to review any municipal roadway, the City
Council needs to pass a resolution directing Mn/DOT to conduct a speed study
needed to determine the appropriate speed limit.
Once Mn/DOT has collected their data they will contact City staff with the
information and together they will determine the safe speed (typically the 85th
percentile speed). 76th/77th Street east of I-35W is posted at 35 mph.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Mn/DOT is responsible for setting all speed limits on roads in
Minnesota.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• When speed limits accurately reflect operating speeds, the difference
in speeds among vehicles is reduced. This results in improved traffic
safety.
C. FINANCIAL
• The adoption of the attached resolution will not have an impact on City
finances.
D. .LEGAL
• The posting of speed limits is the responsibility of Mn/DOT. By
resolution cities request Mn/DOT to perform speed studies to adjust
speed limits.
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Deny the request and maintain a speed limit of 30 mph on 76th Street from I-
35W NB ramp west to Penn Avenue. However, 76th Street has been
widened from I-35W to Penn Avenue and can accommodate increased
speeds.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution requesting Mn/DOT to perform a speed study on 76th Street
between I-35W northbound ramp and Penn Avenue.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None anticipated.
RESOLUTION NO.
-~
RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (MN/DOT) INVESTIGATE THE SPEED ZONE ON 76TH STREET
WEST IN RICHFIELD, MN BETWEEN THE I-35W NB RAMP AND PENN AVENUE.
WHEREAS, the recent reconstruction of 76t" Street between I-35W Northbound
ramp and Penn Avenue has produced a widened road with protected left-turn lanes and a
raised median to increase safety; and
WHEREAS, the existing speed limit on this segment of 76t" Street appears to be
posted unreasonably low; and
WHEREAS, safety and well being of the citizens of Richfield and the motoring
public is enhanced when speed limits on a road are consistent with safe operating speeds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
A request be submitted to MnDOT to investigate the speed zone on 76th Street
between I-35W Northbound Ramp and Penn Avenue to ensure that it is posted at a
reasonable and safe speed to protect the citizens of Richfield and the motoring public.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23th day of
November, 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
CONSENT
4,T
198
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S~ NO.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S~ NO ~ ~, ~ 4
ROBERT HINTGEN, ACTING UTILITY
SUPERINTENDENT
NAME. TITLE
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of award of contract to Malecha Trucking, for lime by-product disposal in the
amount of $196,020.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Award of contract to Malecha Trucking for lime by-
product disposal in the amount of $196,020 for the years 2005 and
2006 with the option to renew for another two years.
II. BACKGROUND
Each year, the Dewatering Plant must dispose of approximately 4,500 cubic yards
of lime by-product. The spent lime from the softening process is in a solid form that
is dropped from presses into waiting trucks. A formal bid opening for atwo-year
(2005 and 2006) contract to dispose of lime by-product was held on Tuesday,
November 9, 2004 with the following results:
1123Lime Disposal
Vendor
Malecha Trucking
Mountain Environmental,
Unit Price Base Bid
$10.89/cu. yd. $ 98,010/yr.
Inc. $17.13/cu. yd. $154,170/yr.
The notice of bids for the lime by-product disposal was published both in the
Construction Bulletin on October 15 and October 22, 2004, and the Richfield Sun-
Current on October 14 and October 21, 2004, and there were two requests from
contractors for the bid specifications.
The contract for 2003 and 2004 was awarded to Mountain Environmental, Inc. at
the price of $86,940 per year.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Melecha Trucking was the lowest responsible bidder and is an
established contractor that meets all requirements.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• It is necessary to remove and dispose the lime by-product from the
dewatering presses.
C. FINANCIAL
• There are sufficient funds in the 2005 Water Maintenance budget for
lime by-product disposal.
D. LEGAL
• If the amount of purchase is estimated to exceed $50,000, sealed bids
shall. be solicited by public notice.
• 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 reject all bids and direct staff to readvertise; however, staff does
not believe we can obtain a better price from a reputable contractor.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Bid minutes and tabulation
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
November 9, 2004
10:30 a.m.
Disposal of Lime By-Product
City Bid No. 04-11
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting
was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for disposal of lime by-product, as advertised
in the official newspaper on October 14 and October 21, 2004 and the Construction
Bulletin on October 15 and October 22, 2004.
Present: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
Judy Disrud, Water Plant Supervisor
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Bidder's Name/City Bid Security Total Base Bid
Malecha Trucking Inc. Cashier's Check $98,010.00/year
Montgomery Unit: $10.89/cubic yard
Mountain Environmental Inc. Not presented $ 154,170.00
Lino Lakes Unit: $17.13/cubic yard
The City, Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the
November 23, 2004. City Council Meeting.
Nancy Gibbs City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
CONSENT
197
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO.
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
1=1
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
aND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 10,14
ROBERT HINTGEN, ACTING UTILITY
SUPERINTENDENT
NAME, TITLE
~i~l ~
SIGNATURE
~~
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of award of contract for 2,800 tons of quick lime for water treatment.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Award of contract to Cutler-Magner Company for quick
lime in the amount of $203,644 for the years 2005 and 2006 with the
nation to renew for another two vears.
II. BACKGROUND
The chemical quick lime is used in the water treatment process to lower water
hardness and to produce soft water. Approximately 1,400 tons of quick lime are
required each year for treatment.
A formal bid opening for atwo-year (2005 and 2006) contract for the purchase of
2,800 tons of quick lime was held on November 9th with the following results:
1123Quick Lime
Vendor Unit Price Estimated Annual Cost
Cutler-Magner Company $72.73/ton $101,822/yr.
The notice of bids for the quick lime was published both in the Construction Bulletin
on October 15, and 22, 2004 and the Richfield Sun-Current on October 14 and 24,
2004 with the hope of a greater response. Although there was only one bidder,
staff is recommending the bid be accepted because the Cutler-Magner Company is
an established contractor with the City and staff does not believe we can obtain a
better price from a reputable contractor.
The contract for 2001 and 2002 was awarded to Cutler-Magner Company at a unit
price of $62.43 per ton, approximately $87,402 per year. This contract was
extended for the years 2003 and 2004 at a unit price of $65 per ton, and $91,000
per year. The $10.30/ton increase since 2001 is a 16.4% increase over 4 years, or
4.1 % annual increase.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Cutler-Magner Company was the only responsible bidder and is an
established contractor that meets all requirements.
-- B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Quick lime is a necessary chemical required to reduce water
hardness.
C. FINANCIAL
• There are sufficient funds in the 2005 Water Maintenance budget for
the purchase of quick lime.
D. LEGAL
• If the amount of purchase is estimated to exceed $50,000, sealed bids
shall be solicited by public notice.
• 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 reject the bid and direct staff to readvertise; however, staff does
not believe we can obtain a better price from a reputable contractor.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Bid minutes and tabulation.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
November 9, 2004
10:00 a.m.
Water Treatment Plant Chemicals
Quick Lime
City Bid No. 04-10
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting
was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for water treatment plant chemicals -quick
lime, as advertised in the official newspaper on October 14 and October 21, 2004 and
the Construction Bulletin on October 15 and October 22, 2004.
Present: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
Judy Disrud, Water Plant Supervisor
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Bidder's Name/City Bond Total Base Bid
Cutler-Magner Co.
Duluth Presented $ 203,644.00
Unit Price $72.73
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the
November 23, 2004 City Council Meeting.
Nancy Gibbs City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4H
REPORT # 19 6
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COtnvCIL GOAL(S) No. N/A AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY CHRISTENSEN, ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER
NAME TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
NAn~', TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW:
~ ~~
SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of scheduling a public hearing on December 14, 2004 regarding the renewal of
pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses for 2005 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc.
and Ca ital Cash, LLC d/b/a H 's Pawn, and set ublic hearin for December 14, 2004.
I. RECOMMENDED- ACTION:
By Motion: Schedule a public hearing to be held December 14, 2004,
for the renewal of pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses
for 2005 for Metro Pawn and Gun, Inc. and Capital Cash, LLC d/b/a
Hv's Pawn.
II. BACKGROUND
The pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer licenses will expire on January 1,
2005.
Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered.
The renewal process has been initiated.
1123 Set PH for Pawnbroker Renewals
Holding the public hearing on December 14, 2004 will provide ample time to
complete the licensing process before January 1, 2005.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City ordinance provides that the City Council conducts a public
hearing to consider all pawnbroker and secondhand goods dealer
license renewals.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• License renewals for 2005 must be approved by December 31, 2005.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may delay the
licensing process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• No one.
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4 G
REPORT # 19 5
~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) No. N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 .GOAL(S) NO N/A
BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT
SERVICES MANAGER
NAME TITLE
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
~, ~~~~~
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of scheduling a public hearing on December 14, 2004 regarding the renewal of
on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor licenses for 2005 for: MDM EAR Inc. d/b/a Backyard
Bar and Grill; Khan's Mongolian Barbeque; Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435;
Fred Babcock VFW Post No. 5555, d/b/a Four Nickels Food and Drink; Don Pablo's Operating
Corporation, d/b/a Don Pablo's; Champps Operating Corporation,. dba Champps Sports Cafe,
Wiltshire Restaurants; LLC dba Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar; The Frenchman's; Taco
Morelos: and. LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano and setting date of public hearing.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Schedule a public hearing to be held December 14, 2004,
for the renewal of on-sale intoxicating and Sunday~liquor licenses for
2005 for: MDM EAR d/b/a Backyard Bar and Grill; Khan's Mon olian
Barbeque; Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435; red
Babcock VFW Post No. 5555, d/b/a Four Nickegs~Food and Drink; Don
Pablo s Operating Corporation d/b/a Don Pablo s Champps
Operating Corporation,. d/b/a Champps Sports Cade, Wiltshire
Restaurants, LLC d/b/a Houlihan's Restaurant & Bar; The
Frenchman s, Taco Morelos, and LaVilla Restaurante Mexicano.
1123 Set PH for Liquor Licenses
II. BACKGROUND
The on-sale liquor licenses for restaurant establishments will expire on January 1,
2005.
Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered.
The renewal process has been initiated.
Holding the public hearing on December 14, 2004 will provide ample time to
complete the licensing process before January 1, 2005
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City ordinance provides that the City Council conducts a public
hearing to consider all liquor license renewals.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• License renewals for 2005 must be approved by December 31, 2004.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL'
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Schedule the hearing for another date; however, this may delay the licensing
process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None anticipated.
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4 F
REPORT # 19 4
J STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY: BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATNE SUPPORT
SERVICES MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
NAME, TITLE
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: ~ ~ ~_`~ ~~
L~ SIGNATURE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of scheduling a public hearing on December 14, 2004 regarding the renewal of
on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for 2005 for Red Pepper Chinese
Restaurant, Thompson's Fireside Pizza, Pu'hket Thai Restaurant, Chipotle Mexican Grill of
Colorado, LLC dba Chipotle Mexican Grill, and The Noodle Shop-Colorado Inc. dba Noodles
and Company. __
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Schedule a public hearing to be held December 14, 2004,
for the renewal of on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor
licenses for 2005 for Red Pepper Chinese Restaurant, Thompson's
Fireside Pizza, Pu'hket Thai Restaurant, Chipotle Mexican Grill of
Colorado, LLC dba Chipotle Mexican Grill, and The Noodle Shop-
Colorado Inc. dba Noodles and Company.
II. BACKGROUND
The on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses for restaurant
establishments will expire on January 1, 2005.
1123 Set PH for Wine and Malt Liquor Licenses
Hearings must be scheduled and held before a renewal license may be considered.
The renewal process has been initiated.
Holding the public hearing on December 14, 2004 will provide ample time to
complete the licensing process before January 1, 2005.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• City ordinance provides that the City Council conduct a public hearing
to consider all on-sale wine and on-sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license
renewals.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Renewals for 2005 must be approved by December 31, 2004.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• Schedule the hearing for another date; .however, this may delay the licensing
process.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• No one.
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
CONSENT
4E
193
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. N/A
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
BETSY OSBORN, ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
NATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consider a request for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, including the
!, outside service of alcohol and food for The Noodle Shop -Colorado Inc., DBA Noodles and
Com an , 7630 L ndale Avenue South.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion:
• Approve the issuance of new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt
liquor licenses for The Noodle Shop -Colorado, Inc., DBA Noodles
and Company, 7630 Lyndale Avenue South.
• Approve the outside service of alcohol and food for Noodles and
Comaanv.
II. BACKGROUND
On April 14, 2004, the City received the application and other required documents
for new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses, and for the outside
service of alcohol and food for The Noodle Shop, DBA Noodles and Company.
1123 Noodles and Company Licenses
The applicant has satisfied all objective criteria for eligibility under state and local
ordinances.
The requirements for license issuance have all been satisfied. They are as follows:
• The applicant has paid the required licensing fees.
• The applicant has complied with all of the procedures/criteria required for
outside service for alcohol and food. They have been approved for 10 outside
seats. If more than 10 outside seats are required, they would need to provide an
overall outside site plan to Zoning and have it approved before they could
exceed that number.
• The required proof of liquor liability insurance coverage has been received,
showing Travelers Indemnity Co. of America affording the coverage.
• Proof of workers' compensation insurance has also been supplied.
• The property is owned by Lyndale Gateway LLC, 7300 Metro Blvd., Suite 585,
Minneapolis, MN 55439. The real estate property taxes are paid and current.
• As this is a new business, there are no unpaid general sales and withholding
taxes.
• As this is a new license, there are no previous "calls for service" or contact
records.
The Public Safety background investigation has been. completed and reveals the
~'^` following:
The applicant and shareholder/managers of The Noodle Shop- Colorado Inc., DBA
Noodles and Company, are Mary Beth Lewis, Wayne Robert. Kimmel) II and Robert
Joseph Serafin. Background checks and criminal histories were conducted on all of
them, and no criminal histories were found.
The on-premise manager is Brenton Henderson. Criminal history and background
checks were done on him, and no criminal history was found. Nothing was found
during this investigation that would raise any concerns about the applicant's
suitability for licensing.
On-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses require owners of establishments
to comply with Resolution No. 9511, which outlines discipline they can expect if any
on-going problems occur. A copy of this resolution has been given to the owner of
the establishment.
There are no distance requirements to notify neighbors of the issuance or renewal
of on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of both City
Codes and State Statues pertaining to on-sale wine and 3.2 percent
malt liquor licenses, and the outside service of alcohol and food for ten
seats.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• That the requirements in Resolution 9511 are met.
C. FINANCIAL
• N/A
D. LEGAL
• N/A
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S)
• The Council could decide to deny the license request, which would mean that
the current applicants would not be able to obtain on-sale wine and 3.2 malt
(^' liquor licenses, nor provide outside service of alcohol and food.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• None
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• Representative(s) of Noodles and Company
l ~
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA SECTION:
AGENDA ITEM #
REPORT #
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
CONSENT
192
REPORT PREPARED BY: CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, ADMIN. ASSISTANT
Nance TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
NAME, TITLE
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of canceling the December 28, 2004 City Council meeting.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
B Motion: Cancel the December 28, 2004 Cit Council meetin .
II. BACKGROUND
• The City Council regularly meets the second and fourth Tuesday evening of
each month. The fourth Tuesday in December is December 28, 2004.
• Past practice has been to cancel the Council meeting on the fourth Tuesday
of December due to the Christmas holiday.
Agenda items for the December 28 Council meeting can be considered on
December 14, 2004 or carried over to January 11, 2005. Therefore, it is
suggested that the Regular Council meeting scheduled for December 28 be
canceled.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• Past. practice has been to cancel the Council meeting on the fourth
~~ Tuesday of December due to the Christmas holiday.
1123cancel
-~ B. CRITICAL ISSUES
~ • City Council business can be considered on December 14, 2004 or
carried over to January 11, 2005.
• This item has been placed on the November 23 City Council agenda
so proper notification can be made if the meeting is canceled.
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Do not cancel the December 28 Council meeting.
V. ATTACHIVIENTS
• None.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None.
-~
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4 C
REPORT # 191
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) NO. AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO NA
REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVEN DEVICH, ADMIN.
SERVICES DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the attached resolution amendments to the Flexible Spending Account Plan
Benefit.
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Adopt the attached resolution approving amendments to
the Flexible S endin Account Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Richfield provides City employees a Flexible Spending Account Plan
benefit that is regulated by federal law. The Flexible Spending Account Plan allows
employees to designate and set aside a biweekly deduction that may be used on a
pre-tax basis for IRS approved medical, insurance and childcare-related
expenditures. Acclaim Benefits, which administers the City's Flexible Spending
Account Plan, ensures strict adherence to current federal law.
Changes in federal COBRA regulations issued May 26, 2004 and effective January
1, 2005 deem it necessary to make changes in the City's Plan Document. In order
("^ to incorporate the COBRA changes into the City's Plan Document; it is necessary
for the City Council to adopt a resolution formally modifying the Plan.
The final DOL COBRA notice regulations are grouped into four sections:
1. General notice requirement;
2. Requirements for employer notice to plan administrators;
3. Requirements for covered employees and qualified beneficiaries to provide
notice to plan administrators; and
4. Requirements for plan administrators to provide notices to covered employees
and qualified beneficiaries.
A summary of the changes is attached to this staff report and resolution.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. hOLICY
• The City offers a Flexible Spending Account Plan to eligible City
employees.
• The Plan should follow federal regulations for such plans.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Federal COBRA law has changed and the changes must be
~' incorporated into the City of Richfield's Flexible Benefit Plan
Document.
• The City should make the changes in November to meet the
mandatory effective date of January 1, 2005.
C. FINANCIAL
• There is no cost to the City for the Plan modifications.
D. LEGAL
• The proposed changes conform to federal law for such plans.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The City Council could choose to review this matter at a later date.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Plan amendment resolution.
Acclaim Benefits summary of changes to Federal COBRA Notice
Regulations.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None.
RESOLUTION NO.
~~~` RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD HEALTH CARE AND DEPENDENT DAY CARE
FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield previously adopted the City of Richfield Health
Care and Dependent Day Care Expense Reimbursement Plan (Plan) January 1, 1991; and
WHEREAS, the (Plan) provides employees with an opportunity to pay for certain
employee welfare benefits on a pre-tax basis;
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield considers it desirable and in the best interests of
the Plan to make the following amendment to the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to the authority reserved in
the Plan to allow amendments to the Plan, the Plan is amended as follows:
• The Plan will operate using the Final COBRA Regulations issued May 26, 2004.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any authorized persons of the City are hereby
authorized to make such contributions from the funds of the City as are necessary to carry
out the provisions of said Plan at any time; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the event any conflict arises between the
,~ ~' provisions of said Plan and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(FRIBA) or any other applicable law or regulation (as such law or regulation may be
interpreted or amended), the City shall resolve such conflict in a manner which complies
with ERISA or such law or regulation.
Adopted, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23 day of
November 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
/~(~ ]~
\/V t~~J111
BElVEF2TS
DOL Publishes Final COBRA Notice Requirements
On May 26, 2004, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) released final COBRA notice
regulations. The final regulations are substantially similar to the proposed regulations
issued by the DOL in May 2003 (which created significantly new requirements for health
plans), but they did add some new "twists."
These regulations apply to notice obligations arising in plan years beginning on or after
November 26, 2004, which means that for "calendar year plans" (plans with a plan year
ending December 31), the new rules will be effective January 1, 2005. Until the
compliance date for a given plan, following either the proposed or final rules will
constitute good faith compliance.
While not exhaustive, this article is designed to familiarize you with the main
requirements established by the DOL, help you to understand what compliance activities
you may need to undertake, and also help you understand how to work more effectively
with Acclaim Benefits to ensure compliance for your health plan(s).
Summary of the Final DOL COBRA Notice Regulations
The final regulations are grouped into four sections:
1. General notice requirement
2. Requirements for employer notice to plan administrators
3. Requirements for covered employees and qualified beneficiaries to provide notice
to plan administrators
4. Requirements for plan administrators to provide notices to covered employees
and qualified beneficiaries
1. General Notice
Health plans are required to provide a "general" notice when an individual first becomes
covered under a health plan subject to COBRA, as has always been the case. The general
notice must be in writing, and must include a rather long list of required elements. A
model general notice has been provided by the DOL, but there are numerous elements of
the model that must be customized, based on the specifics of the employer's plan(s).
The DOL's regulations have established that the general notice must be provided no later
than the earlier of:
• 90 days after coverage under the plan commences, or
• The date a COBRA election form must be provided.
~~.
( ~\ BENEF~`'TS
This notice must be provided when an individual first becomes covered under a plan
subject to COBRA, which would typically include new hires, newly married spouses,
individuals first covered at open enrollment or under a HIPAA special enrollment, etc.
One notice may satisfy this requirement if the employee and spouse reside at the same
address, the notice is addressed to both employee and spouse, and the employee and
spouse become covered at the same time.
Although it is possible to comply with the general notice requirement through distribution
of a summary plan description (SPD), this is often not a good strategy, largely because
the mailing and documentation requirements for providing the general notice are often
not followed in a company's typical SPD mailing process.
The final regulations made three key changes from the proposed regulations with respect
to the general notice:
• The model notice now acknowledges that an event can be a second qualifying
event only if it would have caused a covered spouse or dependent child to lose
coverage under the plan had the first qualifying event not occurred.
• There is no requirement to provide a separate notice to dependent children who
share a residence with the employee or spouse to whom the general notice is
properly furnished.
n • It is not necessary for the general notice to disclose the procedures that qualified
beneficiaries (QBs) must follow with providing a notice of a second qualifying
event.
Acclaim Benefits can work with your organization to assist you in properly complying
with the COBRA general notice requirement.
2. Employer Notice to Plan Administrator
The regulations establish rules for an employer providing notice to a plan's plan
administrator in the event of:
• Termination of employment
• Reduction of hours of employment
• Death of the employee
• Medicare entitlement of the employee
• Certain bankruptcy proceedings
These requirements generally apply only in situations in which the plan administrator is a
separate entity from the employer/plan sponsor. In most situations, the employer/plan
sponsor is the plan administrator (check your plan document to determine this) -for
instance, it obviously would not be necessary for an employer to "tell itself' that an
employee terminated!
2
n(~ ]~
~/V ~a~J'lll
BENEFITS
Please note that these requirements apply to required notices provided to a plan
administrator by an employer, not notification by an employer to a COBRA third party
administrator such as Acclaim Benefits. If one or more of your plans is administered by
an outside (third-party) plan administrator, you will want to work closely with that
administrator to ensure your systems and processes work effectively to comply with these
rules.
3. Covered Employee and Qualified Beneficiary Notices
to Plan Administrator
The DOL regulations provide rules for four situations in which a covered employee
and/or qualified beneficiary must notify the plan's administrator of certain occurrences in
order to maintain COBRA rights. It is extremely important that these rules be disclosed
as required by the DOL regulations in the general and election notices, and the plan's
SPD. Acclaim Benefits can work with you to ensure that these disclosures are made as
required
Qualifying Events
A covered employee and/or qualified beneficiary must provide notice to the plan
administrator of divorce, legal separation, or a dependent child's loss of dependent status
~ under the plan. This notice must be provided no later than 60 days after the later of: the
qualifying event; loss of coverage due to the qualifying event; or the plan's SPD
issuance.
Second Qualifying Events
A qualified beneficiary on COBRA due to an 18-month qualifying event (termination,
reduction in hours) must provide notice to the plan administrator if he/she experiences a
second, 36-month qualifying event such as: death of the employee; employee's Medicare
entitlement; divorce or legal separation; loss of dependent status. Timing requirements
for this notice are the same as those described in the paragraph above.
Social Security Disability Entitlement Determination
If a covered employee and/or qualified beneficiary has been determined by the Social
Security Administration to be disabled, this individual and other family members covered
under the plan pursuant to COBRA may be entitled to an extension of the maximum
COBRA period if this determination was made at some time before the 60`~ day of
COBRA continuation coverage. In order to be entitled to this extension, notice of this
determination must be provided to the plan administrator before the end of the original 18
months of COBRA continuation and no later than 60 days after the latest of: the date of
the disability determination; the date of the qualifying event; the date on which the QB
would lose coverage under the plan; or the date on which the QB is informed of this
obligation through the plan's SPD or general notice. Parts of this requirement are
substantially different from earlier regulatory guidance on this matter.
3
]•
~~~J111
BEtVEFITS
Loss of Social Security Disability Entitlement Determination
When an individual who has been determined by the Social Security Administration to be
disabled subsequently loses that determination, he/she must provide notice to the plan
administrator of this occurrence no later than 30 days after the later of the loss of
disability determination or the issuance of the plan's SPD.
"Reasonable Procedures"
The DOL regulations have indicated that plans shall establish "reasonable procedures"
for furnishing the above notices. These "reasonable procedures" should be included in
the plan's SPD, and should identify:
• How notice should be given
• Who may provide notice
• Who should receive notice
• What information needs to be provided
• Time limits for providing notice
As a matter of benefit risk management, it will be critically important for plans to
incorporate these "reasonable procedures" into their summary plan descriptions
because they establish the rules QBs must follow to maintain their rights under COBRA.
Failure to provide these rules in a plan's SPD could result in a QB's oral or other
informal notice of a qualifying event being binding on the plan, even if notice is given to
individuals who may not ordinarily handle COBRA matters for the plan. Acclaim
Benefits can assist you in developing and incorporating these procedures into your
SPD.
4. Plan Administrator Notices to Covered Employees
and Qualified Beneficiaries
The DOL regulations establish three notice requirements for plan administrators.. The
first, election notice, is of course not new, but the regulations have established significant
new requirements for compliance. Two new notice requirements have now been
established by the DOL as well: a notice of unavailability of continuation coverage, and
a notice of termination of continuation coverage.
4
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4B
REPORT # 190
~~' STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL GOAL(S) No. N/A
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
AND/OR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO NA
STEVEN DEVICH, ADMIN.
SERVICES DIRECTOR
NAME, TITLE
SIGNATURE
~f
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the attached resolution designating City's contribution toward health, term life
and dental insurance remiums for General Services and Mana ement em to ees.
yr~
i
^
LIFE
A $25,000 term life insurance policy is provided for all full-time Management and General
Services employees. The City pays the full premium for this insurance. The current is
$4.88 per month per employee. The rate for 2005 is $4.35 per month per employee, a
decrease of 53 cents per employee per month.
DENTAL
The second type of insurance provided to full-time Management and General Services
employees is aself-funded group dental insurance. In 2004, the City contributed $27 per
month per employee for the total cost of employee (not dependent) coverage. Employees
who desire dependent coverage must pay the full cost of such additional premium, which
for 2004 was $32. These rates will remain the same in 2005. Inasmuch as dental
insurance is self-funded, the City establishes the dental rates from year to year internally,
based upon administrative and benefit payout cost data.
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
The third type of insurance coverage available to full-time Management and General
Services employees is group health coverage. The Local Government Information
Systems Association (LOGIS) group will again offer the Medica High Option Plan,
Elect/Essential Plan and the deductible MIC1000 plan.
In an effort to remain flexible and keep rate increases as low as possible, LOGIS offers a
four-tier system, giving employees the choice of employee only, employee plus spouse,
employee plus child(ren) and family option. By providing this four-tier rating system some
employees are able to benefit by choosing the employee plus spouse option or employee
plus child(ren) option.
LOGIS health insurance rates will not increase for 2005. The City will continue to pay the
full individual employee premium and provide an additional contribution toward dependent
coverage up to a specified maximum insurance premium. In 2005, the City's monthly
contribution for Management and General Services employees would be increased from
$565 to $605 for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren) tiers and from
$580 to $650 for the family coverage tier. The City's contribution for Management and
General Services employees as a percent of premium over the past several years is
shown in Attachment 7. Full-time employees have the option to waive health insurance
coverage through the City if they prove. they have coverage elsewhere. Employees
electing to waive coverage will receive an additional $50 per month on their pay check.
This $50 will be taxed as regular income. -
The 2003 and 2004 monthly premium costs of the health plans are:
2004 Medica 2005 Medica 2004 Medica 2005 Medica
High Option High Option Elect or Medica Elect or Medica
Essential Essential
Employee
Onl $374.75 $374.75 $342.33 $342.33
Employee Plus
S ouse $800.37 $800.37 $731.11 $731.11
Employee Plus
Child ren $756.10 $756.10 $690.66 $690.66
Famil $987.70 $987.70 $902.97 $902.97
2004 Medica 2005 Medica MIC100
MIC 100 Plan deductible Plan
Employee
Onl $333.87 $333.87
Employee Plus
S ouse $713.02 $713.02
Employee Plus
Child ren $673.57 $673.57
Famil $880.35 $880.35
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PART-TIME REGULAR EMPLOYEES
The City will continue to contribute 75% of the single health care premium for part-time
regular employees and increase the dependent coverage contribution to $302.50 per
month for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren) tiers and $325 for the
family coverage tier. Part-time employees may opt out of health insurance altogether.
LONG-TERM DISABILITY (LTD)
The fourth type of insurance provided to all employee groups is long-term disability
insurance (LTD). LTD is provided through a group policy secured by the City. The City
went out for bids in early 2004 because the two-year contract with the current provider
ended April 1, 2004. As a result of the bids, the premium rate for 2004 went from 29 cents
per $100 to 33 cents per $100. Firefighters have not been covered by LTD in the past.
This new rate includes Firefighters.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The City is a LOGIS boardmember and has participated in the process
of receiving the best possible health insurance rates.
• The City continues to provide adequate insurance protection for the
Management and General Services employee groups, which are
comparable to other City employee groups, as well as employees
performing similar. jobs in comparable communities.
• By providing the same coverages, greater benefit equality is achieved
between female classes found in Management and General Services
groups and male classes found in the contracted labor units.
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• The City should implement the premium increases for coverages by
December 1, 2004. Payroll deductions for January insurance
payments, the beginning of the new insurance period, are calculated
in December.
C. FINANCIAL
• The funding necessary to provide for the premium contributions as
recommended will be addressed in the 2005 Revised budget.
• Even with the increase recommended, Richfield will be below the
average of comparable metro cities.
D. LEGAL
• In order to provide the requested insurance benefit changes, the City
Council must approve the resolution designating the City's contribution
toward health, term life and dental insurance premiums for General
Services and Management employees.
IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION(S~
• The Council may take no action to increase the insurance premiums beyond
the current 2004 funding level.
• Defer discussion to another date.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution
The City's Contribution Toward Dependent Health Insurance as a Percent of
Total Premium Cost
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION
TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE
PREMIUM FOR MANAGEMENT AND GENERAL SERVICES EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the hospital-medical/surgical group health insurance plan is available
from the LOGIS Health Insurance program for City employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is
available from the Local Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS) for City
employees; and
WHEREAS, aself-funded group dental insurance plan is available to City
Management and General Services employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a group short-term and long-term disability program is available to City
Management and General Services employees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by resolution the City's
contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of
$650 per month for family health insurance to full-time employees, and in any event, said
contributions shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option.
The City shall give to full-time employees not participating in the City's health plan, a sum of
$50 per month, which will be taxed as regular income. For all full-time Management and
General Services employees, the City shall also pay the $27 monthly premium for the offered
dental insurance plan, and the $4.35 monthly premium for the term life and accidental death
and dismemberment insurance plan for a total possible maximum 2005 insurance premium
contribution of $681.35 per month. The City shall contribute 75% of the single health care
premium for part-time regular employees and a maximum of $325 per month towards
dependent coverage. Part-time employees shall also receive a portion of short-term disability
insurance dependent upon hours worked. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective
January 1, 2005.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall contribute the full cost of long-term
disability insurance for full-time Management and General Services employees.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall determine the City's
contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of
the appropriate resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective organized
employee groups.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd. day of
November 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
Attachment 1
The Citv's Contribution Toward Dependent Health Insurance as a Percent of Total Premium Cost
YEAR HEALTH DEPENDENT CITY CONTRIBUTION CITY CONTRIBUTION
PLAN PREMIUM
COST MGMT./GEN. SVCS AVERAGE % OF
PREMIUM
2001 MEDICA
High Option
* Employee +
Spouse $586.98 $455 78%
* Employee +
Children $554.50 $455 82%
* Family $724.72 $455 63%
Elect Option
* Employee +
Spouse $536.18 $455 85%
* Employee +
Children $506.50 $455 90%
* Family $661.99 $455 69%
Low Option
" Employee +
Spouse $546.93 $455 83%
* Employee +
Children $516.66 $455 88%
* Family $675.28 $455 67%
2002 MEDICA
High Option
"Employee +
Spouse $636.00 $495 78%
* Employee +
_
C ~ Children $600.81 $495 82%
* Family $785.25 $495 63%
Elect Option
* Employee +
Spouse $580.96 $495 85%
* Employee +
Children $548.80 $495 90%
* Family $717.28 $495 69%
MIC 1000
* Employee +
Spouse $534.24 $495 93%
* Employee +
Children $504.68. $495 98%
* Family $659.61 $495 75%
2003 MEDICA
High Option
* Employee +
Spouse ~ $704.43 $515 73%
* Employee +
Children $665.46 $515 77%
* Family $869.74 $530 61%
Elect Option
* Employee +
Spouse $643.47 $515 80%
* Employee +
Children
* $607.85 $515 85%
67%
Family $794.46 $530
MIC 1000
* Employee +
Spouse $591.72 $515 87%
* Employee +
Children $558.98 $515 92%
* Family $730.58 $530 73%
2004
2005
MEDICA
High Option
* Employee +
Spouse $800.37 $565 71
* Employee +
Children $756.10 $565 75%
* Family $987.70 $580 59%
Elect/Essential Option
* Employee +
Spouse $731.11 $565 77%
* Employee + ,
Children $690.66 $565 82%
* Family $902.97 $580 64%
MIC 1000
* Employee +
Spouse $713.02 $565 79%
* Employee +
Children $673.57 $565 84%
* Family $880.35 $580 66%
MEDICA
High Option
* Employee +
Spouse $800.37 $605 76%
* Employee +
Children $756.10 $650 86%
* Family $987.70 $650 66%
Elect/Essential Option
* Employee +
Spouse $731.11 $605 83%
* Employee +
Children $690.66 $650 94%
* Family $902.97 $650 72%
MIC 1000
* Employee +
Spouse $713.02 $605 85%
'' Employee +
Children $673.57 $650 96%
* Family $880.35 $650 74%
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT
AGENDA ITEM # 4A
REPORT # 189
~- STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 23, 2004
Related to:
CITY COUNCIL, GOAL(S) No. NA
REPORT PREPARED BY:
COUNCIL PRESENTER:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEW:
REVIEWED BY CITY
MANAGER:
AND/oR RICHFIELD 2020 GOAL(S) NO 39
THOMAS FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEER
NAME, TITLE
SIGNATURE
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of approval of a Signal Agreement among the City of Richfield, Hennepin
Count and the Minnesota De artment of Trans ortation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the attached resolution for a Signal Agreement
No. 87338M among the City of Richfield, Hennepin County and the
Minnesota Department of Transportation.
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Richfield, Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation have proposed to enter into a signal agreement to operate the two
new traffic signals that will be built as part of the second phase of the reconstruction
of the 66t" Street and Highway 77 interchange that is scheduled to be built in 2005.
As proposed in the attached agreement, the City of Richfield would be responsible
for paying for the electrical power for operating the traffic signals and street lights at
1123SignalAgmts
the interchange. The City would also be responsible for maintaining the street light
poles, replacing street lamps and painting the street light poles as needed.
III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION
A. POLICY
• The proposed signal agreement is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan to "strengthen coordinated transportation efforts
with other communities in the metropolitan area."
B. CRITICAL ISSUES
• Signal coordination in the east-west direction on 66th Street will be
maintained with the proposed agreement.
C. FINANCIAL
• The City will be responsible for the added cost to maintain a second
signal system at 66th Street and the Highway 77 for the new signal to
be installed at the east ramp. This cost is estimated at $1,200 - $1,600
per year.
D. LEGAL
,~ • The agreement assigns ownership of both signals to MnDOT. The City
has responsibility only for maintenance of street lights, and the cost of
electrical power for the signals and street lights.
IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~
• Reject the proposed signal agreement. This alternative would delay
reconstruction of the west ramps and new bridge scheduled for 2005. This
alternative is not recommended.
V. ATTACHMENTS
• Resolution approving the proposed signal agreement among the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation.
• Signal agreement No. 87338M among the City of Richfield, Hennepin County
and the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the signal systems at
the east and west ramps of the 66t" Street and Highway 77 interchange.
• Map of signals.
VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
• None anticipated.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING approval of Signal Agreement No. 87338M
among the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Hennepin County
and the City of Richfield for maintenance of the new traffic signals and street
lights at 66th Street and Highway 77 East and West Ramps
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield wishes to improve traffic signal coordination on
its arterial streets; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has delegated to the
City of Richfield the responsibility to maintain the traffic signal at 76th Street and the
Trunk Highway 35W West Ramp.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into an
agreement with Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota, Department of
Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: Provide Maintenance and Electrical
Energy for the new Traffic Control Signals with Street Lights, Interconnect, and Signing
on T. H. 77 East Ramps at 66t" Street, and West Ramps at CSAH 53 (66t" Street) in
accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No.
87338M, a copy of which was before the Council.
-- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City officers be and hereby are
~ _ authorized to execute such agreement and any amendments, and thereby assume for
and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd day of
November, 2004.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
State of Minnesota
City of Richfield
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution
presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Richfield at a duly authorized
meeting thereof held on the 23~d day of November, 2004, as shown by the minutes of
said meeting. in my, possession.
Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk
~~ MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL
AGREEMENT N0. 87338M
BETWEEN
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AND
THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
AND
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
TO
Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the new
Traffic Control Signals with Street .Lights, Interconnect,
and Signing on T.H. 77 East. Ramps at 66th Street and West
Ramps at CSAH 53 (66th Street) in Richfield, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
{~~ S.P. 2758-62
MAC Project No.06-7-029
Prepared by Metropolitan District Traffic Engineering
ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE AMOUNT ENCUMBERED
None None
Otherwise Covered
PARTIES
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, (State), and the County of
Hennepin, (County), and the City of Richfield, (City).
Minnesota Statutes Section 161.20 authorizes the
Commissioner of Transportation to enter into agreements with any
governmental authority for the purposes of constructing,
maintaining and improving the Trunk Highway system.
The parties have determined that there is
justification and it is in the Public's best interest to remove
~~ the existing traffic control signal at the intersection of Old
f
Cedar Avenue at CSAH 53 (66th Street); and install new traffic
control signals including street lights, interconnect, and
signing, (Traffic. Control Signal(s)) at the intersections of
T.H.. 77 East Ramps at 66th Street and West Ramps at CSAH 53 (66th
Street) .
The City requests and the State agrees to the
installation of Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption Systems, (EVP
System(s)) as a part of the new Traffic Control Signal
installations.
It is considered in the public's best interest for the
County, to provide the new cabinets and control equipment to
operate the new Traffic Control Signals.
r
1
87338M
The County, City, and the State will participate in
the maintenance and operation of the new Traffic Control Signals
and EVP Systems.
n~r.rmr~ r rrm
1. The Minneapolis Airport Commission will prepare
the necessary plan and specifications. (Preliminary
Engineering). The State will prepare the proposal and also
perform all necessary construction inspection, (Engineering and
Inspection).
2. The State with its own resources or by contract
will remove the existing traffic .control signal system on Old
Cedar Avenue at CSAH 53 (66th Street); and install new Traffic
Control Signals and EVP Systems on T.H. 77 West Ramps at CSAH 53
(66th Street) [System "I"] and on T.H. 77 East Ramps at 66th Street
[System "J"] pursuant to State Project No. 2758-62 and MAC
Project No. 106-7-029. The Construction Costs are covered in a
separate Municipal Agreement between the parties. The State
shall assume ownership of the Traffic Control Signals upon
expiration of the Contractor's .Construction. warranty period.
3. The .City will be responsible for the cost and
application to secure an adequate power supply to the service
pads or poles. Upon oompletion of this project, the City .will
thereafter pay. all monthly electrical service expenses necessary
to operate the new. Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems.
4. Upon completion of this project, the
responsibility for the Traffic Control Signals [Systems "I" and
2
87338M
"J"] is as follows: a) The County will, at its cost and
expense: (1) relamp the new traffic control signals; and
(2) clean and paint the new traffic control signals and
cabinets; b) The City will, at its cost and expense:
(1) maintain the new luminaires and all their components,
including replacement of the luminaire if necessary; (2) relamp
the new street lights; and (3) clean and paint the new luminaire
mast arm extensions; and c) The State will, at its cost and
expense, maintain the signing and interconnect, and perform all
other new traffic control and street light maintenance, which
all is to be performed by the. County on a reimbursable basis.
5. The EVP Systems [Systems "I" and "J"] will be
installed, operated, maintained, or removed in accordance with
the following .conditions and requirements.:
a) It shall be the State's responsibility, at
its cost .and expense, to maintain the EVP
Systems which is to be performed by the
County on a reimbursable basis..
b) Emitter units may be installed .only on
authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in
Minnesota Statutes Section 169.01,
Subdivision 5. Authorized emergency vehicles
may use emitter units only when responding
to an emergency.. The City will provide the
State's Metropolitan District Engineer or
his designated representative a list of all
vehicles with emitter units..
3
87338M
d) Malfunction of the EVP Systems must be
reported to the County immediately.
e) In the event the EVP Systems or the
components .are, in the opinion of the State,
being misused or the conditions set forth in
Paragraph b above are violated, and such
misuse or violation continues after the
County receives written notice from the
State, the State may remove the EVP Systems.
Upon removal of the EVP Systems pursuant to
this Paragraph, all of the parts and
components become the property of the State.
f) All timing of the EVP Systems [Systems "I"
and "J"] will be determined by the County's
Traffic Operation Engineer.
6. All timing of the new Traffic Control Signals
[Systems "I" and "J"] will be determined by the County's Traffic
Operation Engineer.
7. `.The County will maintain and keep in repair the
new Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems. The County will
operate the new Traffic Control Signals and EVP. Systems,
including timing, as specified in Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6. The
County will defend and indemnify. the State from any claims
arising out of the performance or non-performance of the
County's .obligations under this paragraph.
8. The County will invoice the State annually for
the actual costs it incurs in maintaining and keeping in good
4
87338M
repair the new Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems, as
specified in Paragraphs 4, 5; and 6 excluding the following:
Maintenance of the luminaires and all its components, including
replacement of the luminaire if necessary; relamping the new
traffic control signals and street lights; and cleaning and
painting the new traffic control signals, cabinets, and
luminaire mast arm extensions, assigned to the County or City by
this Agreement. The invoice must be submitted, in quintuplicate
to the State's Metropolitan Electrical Service Unit. The
invoice must include a detailed itemization of costs and be
signed by a responsible County official, attesting to the
validity of the expenses. Subject to State's approval of the
expenses and encumbrance of funds, the State will promptly pay
the invoice. The invoice, and any supporting documents are
subject to audit by proper State officials, for a minimum of six
years.
8. Each party will be solely responsible for its own
acts and omissions, and the results thereof, to the extent
authorized by law. The State's liability is governed by the
Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736-and
the City's and County's liability is governed by Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 466. Each party will be solely responsible for
its own employees for any Workers Compensation Claims.
9. The City, County,. or .the State may terminate the
terms and conditions covering maintenance and operation.
contained in Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 upon providing 30 days
~ notice to the other parties.. The City's termination must be
1 1
5
87338M
accomplished by a resolution of the City Council. The County's
~ termination must be accomplished by a resolution of the County
Board. The State's termination must be accomplished by a letter
from Mn/DOT's Assistant Commissioner. Upon termination,
responsibility for the Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems
will be as follows: a) The County will, at its cost and
expense: (1) relamp the traffic control signals; and (2) clean
and paint the traffic control signals, cabinets and luminaire
mast arm extensions; b) The City will, at its cost and expense:
(1) maintain the luminaires and all its components, including
replacement of the luminaire if necessary; and (2) relamp the
street lights.; and c) The State will, at its cost and expense,
maintain the signing and interconnect and perform all other
traffic control signal and street light maintenance. In
addition, all timing of the Traffic Control Signals and EVP
Systems will be determined by the State, and no changes may be
made except with the approval of the State.
10. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in
writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and
approved by the same parties who executed and approved the
original Agreement, or their successors in office.
11. If .any party fails to enforce any provisions of
this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or its
right to .enforce it.
12. This Agreement contains all-negotiations and
agreements between the parties relative to this project. No
6
87338M
other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or
oral, may be used to bind either party.
13. Minnesota law governs this contract. Venue for
all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its
breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal -court with
competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
14. This Agreement is effective on the date the State
obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes 160.05,
Subdivision 2, and will remain in effect until terminated by
written agreement of the parties.
~~
7
87338M
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ATTEST:
By.
Deputy/Clerk of the County
Board
Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION:
By:
Assistant County Attorney.
Date:
By
Chair of its County Board
Date:
And.
Assistant/Deputy/County
Administrator
Date:
And.
Assistant County
Administrator, Public Works
Date:
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL:.
By:
Director., Transportation
Department and County
Engineer.
Date
This certifies that the signatories for
the County have lawful authority, by
virtue of board resolution, to bind
the County to the terms of this
Agreement.
8
87338M
CITY OF RICHFIELD
APPROVED AS TO FORM
City Attorney
By
Mayor
Date:
By:
City Manager
Date:
9
87338M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Approved:
By:
State Design Engineer
Metropolitan District Engineer
Date:
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
As delegated to Materials
Management Division
By:
~~ Date .
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION
By:_
Date:
Contract Management
~~~
10
87338M
-~ RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Richfield enter into an
agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of
Transportation for the following purposes, to wit:
Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the new
Traffic Control Signals with Street Lights, Interconnect,
and Signing on T.H. 77 East Ramps at 66th Street, and West
Ramps at CSAH 53 (66th Street) in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement
No. 87338M, a copy of which was before the Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers
be and hereby. are authorized to execute such agreement and any
amendments, and thereby assume for and. on behalf of the City all
of the contractual obligations contained therein.
CERTIFICATION
State of Minnesota
City of Richfield
I hereby certify .that the foregoing Resolution is a
true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted
by the Council of the. City of Richfield at a duly authorized
meeting thereof held on the day of 200_, as
shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession.
City Clerk
(Seal)
i
~ z
i~
~; a
~~ ~
~~
I~~~ ~~
._
,~
~~ ~
.~
J
a~
o~
°~
°
N
O
O
O
O
O
T
AA
IA_
I_
o° 3~
~ L
rn
°
N 2W
O
'3Ab' MO~~
~ 'S '3/~b~ MO~~ 3~JNOl S
~\ --
C
4~ ~ >. ~ ~ c j ' S
C
3~
~ ~ ~m ~ C
_~
~ ~0 ~C
~ 000 C
X000 C
Q00 C
ao C
C
-~,- - ~ ~~~„ _ ~~~ -., ~ .s
,~ _ ~~
~ ,~
~_ ~V I )
~~ ~ C
_~