The URL can be used to link to this page

01-24-00 agenda• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 2000 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING 5:30 P.M. MEET AT RICHFIELD CITY HALL 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE CALL TO ORDER 1. TOUR BY BUS OF FORT SNELLING UPPER BLUFFS AND POLO GROUNDS AREA ADJOURNMENT SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING 6:50 P.M. RICHFIELD CITY HALL HEREDIA ROOM 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE • CALL TO ORDER 1. DISCUSSION OF CITY ADVISORY COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS ADJOURNMENT REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS SECOND SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING RICHFIELD CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL • APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 2000; (2) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 10, 2000; AND (3) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 12, 2000 PRESENTATION INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO PRINT . THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER FOR THE RECORD. 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA AGENDA APPROVAL 2. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR 3. CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION 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 GIVING FORMAL APPROVAL OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLABORATIVE; APPOINTMENT OF CITY MANAGER TO HSSC BOARD OF DIRECTORS, APPOINTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES PLANNER/COORDINATOR AS ALTERNATE TO HSSC BOARD OF DIRECTORS, APPOINTMENT OF CAMILLO DESANTIS TO RESEARCH, PLANNING AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE OF HSSC, AND APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER SUSAN ROSENBERG AS ALTERNATE TO RPC COMMISSION S.R. 20 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF CONDEMNATION OF 50 SQUARE FOOT CORNER OF 6701 NICOLLET AVENUE AND GIVE AUTHORIZATION TO CITY STAFF TO PROCURE APPRAISAL ON SAID PROPERTY AND HAVE CITY ATTORNEY SETTLE CONDEMNATION MATTER AT APPRAISED AMOUNT S.R. 21 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY OF RICHFIELD APPLICATION FOR AND ACCEPTANCE OF ANNUAL HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING GRANT S.R. 22 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION RELATED TO LAND ACQUISITION FOR IMPROVEMENTS AT INTERSECTION OF 66TH STREET AND TRUNK HIGHWAY 77 S.R. 23 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF NEW 4X4 FORD EXCURSION FROM SUPERIOR FORD, INC. FOR USE BY PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DIVISION IN SUM OF $29,247.50 S.R. 24 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF NEW FORD 4X2 FORD EXCURSION FROM SUPERIOR FORD, INC. FOR USE BY ENGINEERING DIVISION IN SUM OF $28,471.75 S.R. 25 . G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF NEW PICKUP TRUCK FROM C&M FORD SALES, INC. FOR USE BY PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE DIVISION IN SUM OF $24,880.50 S.R. 26 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF FIVE NEW SQUAD CARS FROM SUPERIOR FORD, INC., FOR SUM OF $103,932.50 S.R. 27 I. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF HENNEPIN COUNTY'S ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATABASE THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2000 S.R. 28 J. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF CHANGING START TIME OF MAY 1, 2000 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION TO 6 P.M. S.R. 29 K. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION OPPOSING SENATE FILE 2133/HOUSE FILE 2137 PERTAINING TO PRESERVING CABLE TV FRANCHISE AUTHORITY S.R. 30 L. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF ACCESS AGREEMENT FOR USE OF 7645 LYNDALE AVENUE AND 7644 GARFIELD AVENUE BY RICHFIELD SENIOR HOUSING, INC. S.R. 31 M. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY ON-SALE 3.2 INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR, ITINERANT PLACE OF AMUSEMENT,..-ITINERANT FOOD, AND PUBLIC DANCE LICENSES WITH FEES WAIVED FOR SNO-BALL FAMILY EVENT AT CHURCH OF THE ASSUMPTION ON JANUARY 29, 2000 S.R. 32 PROPOSED ORDINANCE 4. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST.READING OF ORDINANCE RELATING TO REGULAR MEETINGS OF CITY COUNCIL, AMENDING SUBSECTION 205.01 OF RICHFIELD CITY CODE; AND RESOLUTION ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE AND DECORUM FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS STAFF REPORT NO. 33 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS 5. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF CITY OF RICHFIELD 2000 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES AND POLICIES STAFF REPORT NO. 34 6. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO FILL EXPIRING OR VACANT TERMS ON CITY ADVISORY COMMISSIONS STAFF REPORT NO. 35 AIRPORT BUSINESS 7. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 8. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 9. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 10. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 11. 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 r .. z:.. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 ADMIN. REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS 6 35 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, ADMIN. ASST. NAW, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER NAME TITLE • • DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: SIGNATURE 1 ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of appointments to City advisory commissions. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Appoint persons to fill the expiring or vacant terms on the City advisory commissions II. BACKGROUND Several terms of City commission members expire on January 31, 2000. In addition, there are mid-term vacancies due to resignations that need to be filled. Vacancies were advertised in the Richfield Sun-Current, cable television channel 16, the message board outside City Hall, the City's web page, and as a feature article in the December Your City. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City advisory commissions were established by City ordinance or resolution. Terms are for three-years and are staggered. Several terms expire on January 31 annually. The Council directs the City Manager's office to conduct a recruitment seeking applicants to fill the vacancies. Interviews of 0124appointments • the applicants are conducted at Special City Council meetings. These Council meetings were posted in accordance with the open meeting law requirements. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Applicants were interviewed at Special City Council meetings on January 6 and January 12, 2000. • Terms of several commission members expire on January 31, 2000. • There are mid-term vacancies which need to be filled. • In order to ensure quorums for future meetings, appointments should be made on January 24, 2000. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A • IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Defer appointments to a later Council meeting. • If appointments are not made at the January 24 meeting, quorums may not be present at future meetings. V. ATTACHMENTS Commission vacancy list. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None expected. 0 • • COMMISSION VACANCIES ADVISORY BOARD OF HEALTH-6 vacancies CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION-1 vacancy COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION-5 vacancies (unexpired term) HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION-4 vacancies (unexpired term) PLANNING COMMISSION-3 vacancies FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION-4 vacancies (unexpired term) 1/24/00 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2002 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2001 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2001 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 January 31, 2003 • J AGENDA SECTION: ADMIN. REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # 5 REPORT # 34 STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, ADMIN. ASST. NAW TITLE SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: v ? ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of City of Richfield 2000 Legislative Initiatives and Policies. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve the City of Richfield 2000 Legislative Initiatives and Policies II. BACKGROUND On January 10, 2000, the Council met with Richfield's legislators to discuss, comment and amend the City's legislative initiatives and policies for 2000. After review and comment, the City Council deferred taking action on this item to the January 24 meeting. This was to provide time for the public to review the initiatives and policies and provide feedback. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY I • For the several years, the City of Richfield has prepared initiatives and policies based upon a combination of prior legislative initiatives and new issues identified by the City Council and City staff. Legislative initiatives from 0124legislative.doc the League of Minnesota Cities and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities are also included in Richfield's package. Richfield's legislators are annually invited to a Council meeting to discuss the initiatives and policies. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Richfield legislators were invited to attend the January 10 Council meeting to discuss the City's 2000 legislative initiatives and policies. • The Council deferred action on this matter to the January 24 Council meeting to allow time for public review of the initiatives and policies. • The booklet has been displayed at City Hall and Augsburg Park Library for public review since January 10, 2000. • City staff have received zero telephone inquiries about the legislative initiatives since the January 10, 2000 meeting. • It is important to note that many of the initiatives included will be priority items for the League of Minnesota Cities and Association of Metropolitan Municipalities as they have state-wide or metro-wide significance. The City of Richfield will focus its efforts on these initiatives related to the airport expansion, affordable housing and transportation. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available at the meeting to discuss this matter. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • The City Council may defer action on this item to another meeting. • The Council may decide to approve all or part of the initiatives. • The Council may decide not to adopt any formal initiatives for 2000. • If the initiatives are not formally approved and adopted, they may not be considered official initiatives and policies for the City. V. ATTACHMENTS City of Richfield 2000 Legislative Initiatives and Policies. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I Public participation in discussing this matter is anticipated. J REVISED DRAFT 2000 • LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES POLICIES 1/24/00 CITY OF RICHFIELD 2000 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES & POLICIES TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION . PAGE RICHFIELD'S 2000 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES ........................................................1 1. LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STABILITY .................................................3 A. LEVY LIMITS B. SALES TAX ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASES C. VALUATION OR OPERATIONS FREEZES D. FISCAL DISPARITIES E. MUNICIPAL BOND INTEREST F. CITY FUND BALANCES/FISCAL YEAR G. PROPERTY TAX REFORM H. MIGHTY DUCKS GRANT FUNDING 1. HACA AND LGA J. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DEDUCTION FROM STATE AID K. REVERSE REFERENDA L. LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX M. N. DEVELOPMENT ACCESS FEES REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION 2. RESOURCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT ..............................................................5 A. RESOURCES FOR AIRPORT MITIGATION B. NEW REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NEEDED TO URBANIZE CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN C. T.I.F. - PRE 1990 DISTRICTS D. T.I.F. - USE OF INCREMENT E. T.I.F. - REGULATION OF PAY AS YOU GO PLANS F. T.I.F. - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS G. POOLING H. HOUSING ACCOUNT 1. ELIGIBLE COSTS J. T.I.F. - INCENTIVE FOR FISCAL DISPARITIES GAINERS K. T.I.F. - MODIFY USE DEFINITION L. T.I.F. RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF T.I.F. M. T.I.F. - EVALUATE FUTURE WINDFALL OF EXPIRED T.I.F. DISTRICTS N. JOB AND WAGE GOALS - ADMINISTRATOR OF BUSINESS SUBSIDY 0. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING RECODIFICATION P. REDEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT 0 3. RENTAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES ................................................................7 A. MHFA RENTAL LOAN PROGRAMS B. REVENUE SOURCES FOR SELECTIVE REHABILITATION C. MAXIMIZE THE 4d PROPERTY TAX BENEFIT 4. RESOURCES FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING .................................................8 A. HOUSING B. PURCHASE PRICE LIMITS C. FIRST TIME ADVANTAGE D. BLIGHTED PROPERTIES PROGRAM E. MHFA HOUSING TRUST FUND F. HOME REMODELING INSURANCE FUND G. LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT 5. ECONOMIC VITALITY ........................................................................................10 A. GOLF COURSE REPLACEMENT B. AIRPORT IMPACT 1. COMMUNITY PROTECTION CONCEPTS 2. COMMUNITY STABILIZATION 3. MAC COMMISSIONER TO SOLELY REPRESENT RICHFIELD 4. PUBLIC FACILITY REPLACEMENT is C. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEE 6. RESOURCES FOR TRANSPORTATION ...........................................................12 A. TRANSPORTATION B. STREET AUTHORITY C. LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON MINNESOTA RESOURCES (LCMR) D. CITY SPEED LIMIT CONTROL E. USE OF PHOTOGRAPHY FOR ENFORCEMENT OF TRAFFIC LAWS F. TRANSIT TRUST FUND G. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEES H. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY 1. TRANSPORTATION FUNDING 7. COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ..............................................14 A. WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION B. HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE C. MANAGEMENT OF WETLANDS 8. PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE .....................................................................15 A. ELECTION ISSUES B. DEFINITION OF DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES C. NEED FOR HRA COMMISSIONER 9. CONTINUANCE AND AFFORDABILITY OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES ...............16 A. MAINTENANCE GARAGE FACILITIES/SITE B. UNFUNDED MANDATES C. PAY EQUITY D. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS E. PELRA F. RECOVERY OF D.W.I. ARREST COSTS G. WORTHLESS CHECKS H. CRIME PREVENTION 1. STATE BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE J. FIREARM TRANSFER PERMIT FEES K. TELECOMMUNICATIONS L. z BLEACHER SAFETY LEGISLATION 10. HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING AND COORDINATION ...................................18 A. INTERVENTION AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM B. CHILD PROTECTION C. CHILD CARE D. DATA PRIVACY E. VOLUNTEERISM F. HEALTH CARE G. H. THIRD PARTY PAY ' RESOURCES FOR FAMILY SERVICES COLLABORATIVE 1. IMMIGRATION 11. MUNICIPAL LIQUOR OPERATIONS .................................................................21 A. WINE SALES 0 RICHFIELD'S 2000 LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES One of the key actions that have set Richfield apart from many metropolitan area first- ring suburbs is its ability to endure the worst of circumstances in the best manner. Richfield has risen above even the most difficult circumstances to not only survive, but build on that survival by revitalizing itself time and again. This "can do attitude" is a tribute to its citizens, its elected and appointed officials/representatives and its unwavering tenacity and dedication to a quality community both now and into the future. Richfield is a community of men, women and children who have never let adversity deter it from providing a safe and quality environment within which people can live, work, learn and prosper. And, the City has prospered. Prospered while, all around its border, change has been thrust upon Richfield - too often requiring the City to re- evaluate its direction and response to the changes. Richfield has always turned adversity and change into opportunities and benefits. The most recent example is the expansion of the MSP airport. Unlike almost any other area in the nation, an international airport has moved steadily closer to Richfield's borders - moved closer to homes that, when built over 40 and 50 years ago, were literally miles from the airport. And with the enlargement of the airport, have come increased overflight noise and the low-frequency noise problems that will result from the operations of the North-South Runway. The City has lost two entire neighborhoods, two parks, a popular, revenue-generating golf course and hundreds of thousands dollars in taxes and revenues. But the City of Richfield did not sit back and do nothing. It developed replacement housing opportunities, new redevelopment centers and recreation amenities that ensured economic competitiveness in the area. And, it continued to seek collaborative ways to co-exist with the expanding airport while maintaining its own vitality. Richfield developed a plan for its future. This pattern of collaboration is not new for Richfield, An earlier example can be found with the construction of 1-35W. Not too long ago, Wood Lake in Richfield was a large, beautiful lake that hosted many large lakehomes, boat launches and provided a regional recreational amenity. The construction of 1-35W resulted in the drainage of the lake, its reduction in size and aquatic uses and left many lakehomes without a lake. But Richfield survived and out of the construction and forced change, a new recreational amenity was created to keep the community viable and strong. Freeways, airport expansion, urban sprawl, housing shortages, aging housing stock, economic good times and bad times, tax increment tax law changes, levy limits, environmental law changes and so much more have impacted Richfield both positively and negatively. But what is important to remember, is that Richfield has stepped to the plate each and every time and turned the negative to the positive. The City has done this by being proactive, by being a participant rather than an observer in the political, legislative and congressional arenas. It is this informed participatory stance that has helped Richfield lead when often others have been ill prepared to act quickly to changing circumstances. It is Richfield's active involvement with issues relating to transportation, economic development, housing construction, rehab and affordability, land use compatibility and use, open space, park development, crime, redevelopment and the airport expansion that has made Richfield a leader in the metropolitan area. Richfield acts. It does not react. And, in doing so, Richfield often frames the issues and works collaboratively to address and resolve issues of local, regional and statewide significance. In the pages that follow, the City of Richfield has identified issues and positions that are critical to the continued physical, economic, cultural and fiscal well being of Richfield. While Richfield fully recognizes that it must always be involved, informed and invested, it is also fully recognizes that it is a partner in the legislative process. Richfield cannot accomplish what it needs to remain vital and responsive to its people without the resources and support from its Legislative and Congressional partners. Therefore, the City of Richfield seeks to partner with local, regional, state and national representatives to help us maintain Richfield as the wonderful community that it is today and will continue to be in the future. is 2 CHALLENGE 1 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT FINANCIAL STABILITY Cities everywhere are ever diligent in their efforts to maintain financial stability in order to continue to provide for the health, safety and welfare of the people who live, visit, work and do business in their communities. Richfield has experienced more external influences on their ability to maintain financial stability than most Minnesota cities. In order to remain vital, and responsive to its citizens in all areas of municipal service delivery, it is vital that the Legislature and Congress take action that will enhance opportunities for Richfield and other cities to remain financially stable. It is with this in mind that Richfield subscribes to the following: RESPONSE I.A. LEVY LIMITS POSITION The City strongly opposes levy limits and urges the Legislature not to re-enact levy limits for 2001 and beyond. I.B. SALES TAX ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT PURCHASES POSITION The City supports the position that the state should reinstate the sales tax exemption for all local government purchases. This exemption should not be offset with cuts in LGA or HACA. I.C. VALUATION OR OPERATIONS FREEZES POSITION The City strongly opposes the imposition of alternatives such as valuation or payroll freezes or any other state imposed limitations that erode the ability of local governments to exercise self governance. 1.13. FISCAL DISPARITIES POSITION The City urges the Legislature to continue to support the fiscal disparities program. The City strongly opposes the use of fiscal disparities to fund social or physical metropolitan programs since such a practice would result in a metro- wide property tax increase hidden from the public with an excessive impact on communities with lower property tax wealth. 1.E. MUNICIPAL BOND INTEREST MONITOR The City strongly supports the maintenance of the tax exemption for municipal bond interest income. 1.F. CITY FUND BALANCES/FISCAL YEAR MONITOR The City supports the position that the Legislature should not attempt to control or restrict city fund balances since such funds are necessary to maintain the fiscal viability of cities. The City strongly opposes any state mandated changes to the fiscal year of cities. 1.G. PROPERTY TAX REFORM MONITOR The City supports reasonable and rational property tax reform. To that end, the City would support legislation that incorporates the following principles: • Simple and accountable, recognizing that the property tax system serves diverse financial needs. • Recognizes city cash flow needs and not jeopardize existing development districts, tax increment districts or enterprise zones. 3 • Assures a diversified revenue source for cities. • Protects cities' ability to determine and generate revenue and not be dependent upon referenda. • Assures that net property tax for metro city taxpayers not increase as a result of property tax reform which reduces or diverts aid. • Stabilizes city revenue sources so cities may effectively do both short and long range planning. • Based on class rate tax capacity system not a combination of tax capacity and market value. • Includes elements that promote fairness and geographic balance based system. • Not include a new sales tax on local water or sewer utilities. - • Not include a state levied property tax. 1.H. MIGHTY DUCKS GRANT FUNDING POSITION The City urges the Legislature to provide the funding necessary to complete the partial grants awarded for 1998. Grants for new facilities in 1998 amounted to $125,000 per facility instead of $250,000. Cities such as Richfield relied on this grant assistance to help pay for the new ice arena facility. The provision of the second $125,000 of the grant is still very important to the City of Richfield in reimbursing it for a portion of the costs of constructing the new ice sheet. 1.1. HACA AND LGA POSITION The City supports the position that LGA and HACA, or similar replacement revenues, be continued and additional state resources greater than the rate of inflation must be allocated to prevent rapid future property tax increases. The City strongly opposes the conversion of city LGA and HACA to school aid. I.J. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DEDUCTION FROM STATE AID POSITION The City supports the position that all appropriations from LGA resources that fund state operations should be repealed. I.K. REVERSE REFERENDA POSITION The City strongly opposes the imposition of reverse referenda requirements which undermine the decisions of local government officials. I.L. LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX POSITION The City supports the position that the Legislature should generally authorize local sales taxes for cities upon local approval. 1.M. DEVELOPMENT ACCESS FEES POSITION The City is in accord with the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) in support of authorization for cities to impose Development Access Fees for roads and stormwater control. In order to fairly provide for major street and stormwater improvements of primary benefit to a particular subdivision development but not directly assessable and to allocate cost so that new growth pays its fair share, the legislature should authorize cities to establish at their option a road and/or stormwater development access charge to be collected at the time that subdivisions are approved and/or at the time building permits are issued similar to park dedication fees. 4 1.N. REVENUE DIVERSIFICATION POSITION The City supports the AMM position of revenue diversification for cities to reduce the reliance on local property taxes. Some example include authorization for local sales taxes, payments in lieu of taxes, franchise fees, deed taxes to remain with city, development impact fees, or the creation of a separate income/sales tax fund that would grow with the economy. The AMM opposes legislated reduction or limitation on various license fees, or other general fees that would force increased property tax to pay for related services. CHALLENGE 2 - RESOURCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT Richfield has made significant progress in reversing the deterioration and decline in commercial-retail areas of the City. Market conditions, the significant lead-time required for development, and the considerable expense to address the remaining blighting conditions and planned public improvements require additional resources. Richfield demonstrates a prudent and proper use of Tax Increment Financing. RESPONSE: 2.A. RESOURCES FOR AIRPORT MITIGATION INITIATE In 1999, the Minnesota State Legislature created an Airport Impact Zone in the eastern portion of the City of Richfield. Within the legislation the Legislature recognized that this 50 block area would suffer significant and unique socioeconomic and environmental impacts as a result of airport expansion. In order to correct this problem the Legislature found that land use conversion is an appropriate remedy within the Airport Impact Zone. The Legislature also appropriated $30 million of MAC bonding to help fund the needed land use conversion. This amount represents about one-third of the total amount needed in 1996 dollars. The MAC funding was put on hold this past year by the FAA, over a question on the issue of revenue diversion. This has left the needed mitigation in limbo, while the runway is already under construction. The City urges the Legislature to remedy this problem. In addition the Legislature created the Governor's Airport Community Stabilization Funding Task Force. The task force's purpose is to identify State, Federal, MAC, and local sources of revenue that can be used to pay for airport mitigation projects. The City supports the recommendations of the Governor's Task Force and urges the Legislature to adopt the task force's recommendations. In particular the City supports the creation of a mitigation account to be administered by the state for the purposes of on-going funding of state approved mitigation projects. The Legislature should fund the mitigation account by: dedicating all or a portion of the sales tax collected at the airport, increasing the sales tax on auto rentals, increasing the aviation fuel tax, authorizing MAC and the Met Council to collect property taxes currently uncollected at the airport, and through a general fund contribution. • 5 2.13. NEW REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NEEDED TO URBANIZE CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INITIATE A new type of Tax Increment Redevelopment District is sought in recognition that urbanizing the suburban core, particularly that area that is adjacent to or within the Interstate 494/694 loop, is more cost effective than the increased public cost of urban sprawl. The Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint and Richfield Comprehensive Plan encourage higher density housing, transit- oriented design, and commercial and mixed uses where existing low density single family and stagnant multi-unit housing are adjacent to declining commercial and transportation systems. Achieving higher density development in the suburban core is equal to the removal of blight as a qualifying redevelopment objective; allowing active implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 2.C. T.I.F. - PRE 1990 DISTRICTS MONITOR The Legislative Auditor questioned the use of the pre 1990 increment in and outside of districts. The Auditor recommends that the use of the increment be limited to specific expenditures or require the expenditure prior to a certain date. 2.13. T.I.F. - USE OF INCREMENT MONITOR The League of Cities is discussing the use of increment for job training, historic preservation, technological infrastructures, and transit-oriented development. 2.E. T.I.F. - REGULATION OF PAY AS YOU GO PLANS MONITOR There is interest in reviewing the agreements as to the rate of interest and the use of the increment to pay for activities that may not be eligible costs. 2.F. T.I.F. - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MONITOR The inflation adjusted base should be amended or eliminated. 2.G. POOLING MONITOR Permit the pre 1990 rules to apply to the post 1990 districts. 2.H. HOUSING ACCOUNT INITIATE Expand the authority to have a housing account now operative in two cities to all cities. The account receives a portion of the increment and uses it for housing activities in the city. An account which is exempt from LGA-HACA penalties makes the greatest investment in housing programs and improves performance with Livable Communities objectives. 2.1. ELIGIBLE COSTS MONITOR There is concern that T.I.F. is being used for such activities as the development of private building. 2.J. T.I.F. - INCENTIVE FOR FISCAL DISPARITIES GAINERS POSITION Develop and support legislation that would provide special financing incentives unique to communities that are significant fiscal disparities gainers. This would help balance the concerns of fiscal disparities losers who believe that they are supporting commercial/industrial tax base poor communities to a i greater extent than necessary. 6 2.K. T.I.F. - MODIFY USE DEFINITION POSITION Support modifying the definition of administrative services within Tax Increment Districts to include health and safety support services identified by the redevelopment district plan and budget. 2.L. T.I.F. - RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF T.I.F. MONITOR Resist further restriction on the use of Tax Increment Financing given that it remains one of the only ways for Richfield to finance the expensive redevelopment of deteriorated commercial areas. The City of Richfield supports legislation to permit the use of T.I.F. for redevelopment, particularly housing development in redevelopment districts, without the loss of state aid. 2.M. T.I.F. - EVALUATION FUTURE WINDFALL OF EXPIRED T.I.F. DISTRICTS MONITOR Request House Research to evaluate the windfall in property tax receipts that Hennepin County will receive after the year 2000. Those resources could provide a long-term reduction in the amount of resources needed for state funded and County administered human service and other important programs and reduce the property tax burden for Hennepin County property owners. 2.N. JOB AND WAGE GOALS - ADMINISTRATOR OF BUSINESS SUBSIDY POSITION Tax increment redevelopment and housing district job and wage goals should be removed. The purpose of redevelopment in communities such as Richfield is not job creation. The purpose is revitalization and stabilization. Job and wage goals and redevelopment, therefore, should not be linked. The addition of business subsidy requirements in 1999 is an unfunded mandate which duplicates work already required in establishing tax increment districts. 2.0. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING RECODIFICATION MONITOR Recodifying of existing law is often discussed. Amendments may be offered which impact TIF use. The process should be monitored and opposed if current rules are changed in a way that reduces Richfield's ability to redevelop with TIF. 2.P. REDEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT POSITION In 1997, the Legislature established a Redevelopment Account administered by the MN Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED). Resources are limited and require cities to have pollution cleanup issues if they will be competitive for funds. The City supports less restrictions or more flexible uses of the funds to support suburban core redevelopment challenges related to the cost of acquisition, relocation and demolition when TIF resources are insufficient. The City also supports the state issuance of bonds to finance the Redevelopment Account, thereby increasing funds available. CHALLENGE 3 - RENTAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES Richfield has approximately 4,600 rental units (63 percent one bedroom, 29 percent two bedroom), which were built primarily from 1960 to 1970. The apartments require investment and repair to be livable and desirable. Vacancy rates are variable. The rental housing investment climate does not make owner investment attractive. MHFA rental housing loan programs require rent control and income qualifying which are disincentives to owner participation. An increasingly lower income and more diverse population causes concentration and places greater demand on social service, health and safety programs. Richfield has developed a coordinated apartment 7 owner/manager/tenant program of information sharing, image and marketing, communication and community service support. A special law "This Old Apartment" offers some property tax increments for Richfield to remodel. Twenty-six percent of apartments have apartment owners that receive a property tax incentive known as 4d because they keep their apartments affordable to rent. The City loses property tax revenues with this approach to affordability. RESPONSE: 3.A. MHFA RENTAL LOAN PROGRAMS POSITION Support modification of MHFA rental loan programs to provide opportunities to achieve broader economic integration of rental occupancy; serving rental households at up to 60 percent of median ($38,160). 3.13. REVENUE SOURCES FOR SELECTIVE REHABILITATION POSITION Support new revenue sources which can be used for the selective rehabilitation or the acquisition and clearance of deteriorating buildings and replacement with more appropriate land uses. Incentive funding for multi- housing rehab has been a successful program in Richfield that should receive ongoing financial support. Livable Communities Act and State challenge resources are meant to serve suburban core communities that seek a more economically diverse and less affordable housing stock with the jobs already in place just as the opposite objective may be true in outlying suburbs. One for one housing replacement policies do not achieve Richfield's objective of no net loss of housing units and Livable Community objectives of a more economically diverse rental housing stock. 3.C. MAXIMIZE THE 4d PROPERTY TAX BENEFIT INITIATE Apartment owners that are benefiting by reduced property taxes must 1), keep units affordable and 2) invest a percentage of property tax benefits into their buildings. Item 2 is presently not required. CHALLENGE 4 - RESOURCES FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING Richfield has approximately 11,200 single family homes (5 percent built prior to 1939, 62 percent built prior to 1960). Many single family homes require renovation and repair. Many more can benefit from additional home improvements and remodeling which provides features desirable to today's homeowners and buyers. Resources are insufficient to counter flight to developing suburbs and potential abandonment. RESPONSE: 4.A. HOUSING POSITION While housing is a community development issue, it is the highest need identified by the South Hennepin Family Service Collaborative Resource Center. Finding affordable housing for families seeking assistance is becoming next to impossible to achieve. Recommendation I • Provide more State funds for affordable housing needs to increase the supply and assist families in achieving affordability with grants, loans and housing subsidies for both low-income renters and homeowners. 4.13. PURCHASE PRICE LIMITS INITIATE Increase purchase price limits to match the $123,000 average sale price in Richfield and remove penalties to communities that commit to use MHFA 8 financing when interest rates change often. This has penalized Richfield for using MHFA mortgage money that does not have a competitive rate. As a result, Richfield can not receive MHFA mortgage money for two years unless a change in law is made. Families with children choose a smaller, below average home that requires more repair when using MHFA financing. Instead, families are making economic choices to live in distant suburban areas, contributing to urban sprawl when good choices are available locally. Families that choose elsewhere because of financing options cause additional school population decline. 4.C. FIRST TIME ADVANTAGE INITIATE Those first time buying, income qualified households that do purchase and repair, are doing so in Richfield because of a Richfield HRA developed program funded by MHFA Community Rehabilitation Fund resources. Pilot programs have served 12 households successfully. This program should become a regularly funded MHFA program with an allocation system less reliant on competition to secure funds. 4.13. BLIGHTED PROPERTIES PROGRAM POSITION Support the continuation of the MHFA Community Rehabilitation and Richfield's New Home/Richfield Rediscovered Programs which provide funds for acquisition and demolition of blighted neighborhood conditions. Approximately 165 Richfield homes are program candidates. Approximately $500,000 annually removes eight to nine homes and provides new housing opportunities. Revenue from land sales provides a net project cost closer to $300,000. 4.E. MHFA HOUSING TRUST FUND POSITION Support changes to MHFA's Housing Trust Fund which place greater emphasis on large family ownership and rental opportunities in the suburban core. Persons with incomes up to 30 percent of median ($19,100) presently benefit from affordable housing opportunities in other parts of the state. This income is too low to support ownership in the suburban core. A change of income limits, an increase to 60 percent of median ($38,160), would assist the HRA in the acquisition and clearance of substandard housing and the development of family ownership housing in cooperation with a nonprofit housing developer such as Habitat for Humanity. 4.F. HOME REMODELING INSURANCE FUND INITIATE Develop a pilot insurance pool with MHFA reserves to assist the private financing activity of Richfield homeowners. A set aside of funds would reduce the risk of private lenders lending funds to homeowners at 100 percent or more of loan to value regardless of income. Homeowners that wish to repair and invest are often limited to accessing private capital because of lack of home investment expendable income and low equity levels. In addition, dollar-for- dollar return from remodeling is difficult or unlikely. A shared risk pool encourages remodeling. Approximately 20 homes with $100,000 values ($2,000,000) would need to secure 10 to 20 percent (or $200,000 to $400,000) in equity protection through decreasing term insurance to facilitate private activity loans. 4.G. LIVABLE COMMUNITIES ACT POSITION The City needs the Livable Communities Act funding to support redevelopment initiatives. This can be achieved by broadening the uses of existing funds to provide direct financial support that would help Richfield 9 achieve a more diverse, less affordable, housing market. Richfield is already an area of sufficient quantity of affordable housing. This can also occur by supporting higher density transit-oriented development which Richfield is suited for. CHALLENGE 5 - ECONOMIC VITALITY Support a package of new and modified revenue sources to ensure that resources are of a sufficient quantity to have a positive impact on housing, redevelopment, maintenance and essential services in Richfield. Of particular concern are the impacts due to airport operations and long range planning. RESPONSE: - 5.A. GOLF COURSE REPLACEMENT INITIATE The City strongly urges the Legislature to amend current State Statutes that would permit the City of Richfield to negotiate with the Department of Natural Resources to either lease or purchase the Fort Snelling Golf Course. While legislation was passed in 1999 that dealt with the entire polo grounds and upper bluffs recreational areas, that legislation only provided a mechanism for the City of Minneapolis to lease the entire area. The opportunity for the City of Richfield to either lease or acquire the Fort Snelling Golf Course as a replacement to the loss of the Rich Acres Golf Course due to airport expansion is still of urgent importance to the City of Richfield. 5.13.1. AIRPORT - COMMUNITY PROTECTION CONCEPTS INITIATE The legislative decision to keep the airport at its current location for the benefit of the state and Metropolitan area creates an obligation to ensure that every effort is exerted to resolve and mitigate noise issues within the affected communities. • Mitigation programs for low frequency noise need to be created and constantly monitored for effectiveness. • Enhanced mitigation programs should be provided through state and MAC funds for areas impacted by airport activity. A program of reduced subsidy should be initiated for several miles beyond the current contour. A cut-off would be based on distance and noise level. • Noise monitoring systems, including low frequency noise measures, should be enhanced and operated independently to ensure noise abatement procedures compliance. • The legislature should require MAC to implement a plan and MPCA to monitor the effect of airport operations on local air and water quality. 5.13.2 AIRPORT - COMMUNITY STABILIZATION INITIATE Airport expansion places unique challenges on Richfield and other communities surrounding the airport as they work to improve the quality of life within their cities. In 1996, the Legislature decided to keep and expand the airport at its current site. At that time, the Legislature did not give the cities impacted by that expansion the tools they need to keep their communities stable. • Community Stabilization Techniques - Possible programs include property value guarantees underwritten by the participating municipalities, tax credits for housing revitalization in noise impact areas similar to recent Metropolitan Council incentives for homeowners in declining neighborhoods, and 10 acquisition of incompatible land use prior to deterioration such as the New Ford Town and Rich Acres buyout. • Community Revitalization Approaches - Examples would be tailored tax increment financing districts and community development banks, both of which would make it easier for communities to revitalize or redevelop areas where necessary. Tax increment financing represents one of the few remaining tools for fully developed cities to implement needed redevelopment, given the costs of such projects in an environment of increasingly limited financial resources. A reduced base for calculating tax increment improves financial feasibility for redevelopment near the airport. The state should fund the fiscal disparities contribution of TIF districts within airport impact zones. • Incentive Program - Similar programs are often utilized as a trade-off for developments and other land uses that provide more of a benefit for regional users than is received by those directly impacted; e.g., recreation centers built as compensation for large industrial developments. • Airport Protection Measures - These would include local land use controls to prohibit or control future developments that may be incompatible with airport impacted areas, unless appropriate mitigation measures are taken. 5.13.3. AIRPORT - MAC COMMISSIONER TO SOLELY REPRESENT RICHFIELD INITIATE Richfield is significantly impacted by MAC activities. Minneapolis and St. Paul have MAC representatives selected by each city. All other appointments are made by the Governor. It would be appropriate to endorse legislation that would permit appointment of a Richfield MAC representative by the City of Richfield. 5.13.4. AIRPORT - PUBLIC FACILITY REPLACEMENT INITIATE The expansion of the airport's runway system at the current location will require the removal of three recreation areas: the Rich Acres Golf Courses and Driving Range and the East Little League/Softball Fields (a total of 14 fields), and the Richfield Community Gardens. With the approval of the final EIS on proposed Runway 17-35, the City of Richfield offers the following funding options for relocation of displaced public facilities: • State Appropriation - A special bill could be drafted that would provide a grant to the City of Richfield to complete the financing of replacing the ball fields that are currently on MAC property. The City has received a $2 million grant from the State, which will pay about half of the ball field replacement project expenses. An additional $2 million is required. Also, a $6 million grant will be needed to assist with the funding of the replacement of Rich Acres Golf Course. The grant would be in conjunction with a transfer of the Fort Snelling Golf Course to Richfield. The grants could be either a general fund or capital fund grant. If a local match is required, the match can be made by the displacing agency or shared by the metro agency and the host city. A displaced public facility will need to be defined to include a leased facility as well as one owned by the host city. • Metropolitan Council Law Amendment - The Council's enabling statute (Chapter 473) could be amended to incorporate the requirement that the Metropolitan Council or metropolitan agency provide monetary compensation to the host city so that the facility can be replaced. The source of the funding could be a state grant, the issuance of bonds, agency resources (fees, and/or charges) and a tax levy. The facility 11 replacement requirement will be a prerequisite for the construction of the improvements (i.e. the facility cannot be built or improved until the Council or metropolitan agency agrees to replace the facility). • Host City Authority - The host city could be authorized to issue, without a referendum, general obligation bonds to finance the replacement facility. The debt service would be paid by the Metropolitan Council or metropolitan agency. The amount of debt service to be paid by the metropolitan agency will need to be determined. S.C. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEE POSITION Support legislation which would enable the City to impose an annual fee for community development activities. The fee. would be used for housing, neighborhood preservation and redevelopment initiatives of the HRA much like waste management fees support recycling and conservation fees support wet land protection. CHALLENGE 6 - RESOURCES FOR TRANSPORTATION Richfield is significantly impacted by proposed improvements to 1-494,1-35W, 62 Crosstown and TH 77. Richfield has been directly involved with monitoring and influencing the planning for these roadway improvements. Careful attention must be given to balancing regional and local interest. Richfield understands that lack of additional capacity for these roadways would likely generate additional pollution, force more regional traffic onto neighborhood streets and decrease traffic safety within the community. However, the loss of homes and encroachment in residential areas must be carefully considered. RESPONSE: 6.A. TRANSPORTATION POSITION Transportation continues to be one of the most critical needs for people generally, and especially for those with low incomes, the working poor and welfare-to-work employees. It is important not only for daily living needs, but in getting to and from work. Recommendation • Provide incentives to local communities and regions to develop experimental transportation services while a broader solution is worked out. • Strengthen the Livable Communities Act by enabling more low-income people and others needing transportation to live in outlying communities closer to the job sources thereby minimizing transportation needs. • Provide incentives to employers to create their own transportation service for affected employees beyond the car-pooling concept. 6.B. STREET AUTHORITY POSITION The City supports the legislation that would permit cities to establish a Street Authority as an optional funding source for street maintenance. The League of Minnesota Cities has urged the Legislature to permit cities to create a transportation authority. Such authorization would address: • Reduced revenues available for local street and road improvements. • The benefits to all taxpayers of a properly maintained local transportation system. • The severe limitations of existing special assessment authority. 12 The AMM is requesting the legislature to authorize cities to establish a transportation authority for street maintenance and reconstruction of aging infrastructure, similar to the existing stormwater utility, so that costs of improved facilities can be more fairly charged to the users rather than the general population as a whole. 6.C. LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON MINNESOTA RESOURCES (LCMR) POSITION Support the LCMR's 20 year commitment to recommending funding for various natural resource projects including many in city, county and state parks. Support the continued LCMR efforts to fund trails and trail connections to promote non-motorized transportation and recreation in Minnesota. Trails are linear parks connecting people and spaces as well as destinations. Trail use in this region for biking, walking and in-line skating is on the increase. Support this environmentally sound form of recreation as it is good for the body, the soul, and the environment. The challenge to all is not only to connect our city trails but to connect the city, county and state trail system. It is a vision for the future to set aside land in the cities, counties and throughout the state to be designated as linear parks or trails. In summary: • Support continued designation of the LCMR. Encourage the Environmental and Natural Resource Trust Fund to prioritize the following two items for funding: 1. Expenditures support preservation management and restoration of natural resources that encompass both urban and rural environmental issues. 2. Trust Fund expenditures for trail connections and corridors throughout the state by building trails that promote non-motorized transportation. • Support a state bonding bill for parks and trails that represents the level of funding appropriate to acquire, develop/redevelop, and protect parks within the state, region and local jurisdictions. • Encourage Senators and Members of Congress to reinstate Land and Water Conservation (LAWCON) funds. • Continue funding of the Local Grants Initiative Program. 6.13. CITY SPEED LIMIT CONTROL POSITION The Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation currently establishes speed limits on streets. The speed limit for residential streets is established at 30-mph. However, cities have developed variable land use patterns, street layouts, densities and also have varying topographical conditions. There are many local streets where 30-mph is not a reasonable nor a safe speed. Many other cities in the area have a 25-mph speed limit for local streets. Support legislation for a 25-mph urban speed zone. 6.E. USE OF PHOTOGRAPHY FOR ENFORCEMENT OF TRAFFIC LAWS POSITION Support legislation which would allow use of motion imaging detection (photography) for enforcement of traffic laws, specifically in violations of traffic signals, railroad crossing signals, construction work zones and excessive speeding. 13 The City's position is in concert with the AMM. The AMM requests legislative action authorizing utilization of motion imaging recording system technology for governmental units, including cities, on streets and highways to assist promotion of safety and traffic law compliance enforcement. The technology has been proven and is currently used for law enforcement by numerous states, municipalities and other countries. The state should consider a pilot project on municipal streets in the metropolitan area. 6.17. TRANSIT TRUST FUND POSITION The City supports legislation that would permit cities to establish a separate Transit Trust Fund to support transit operations statewide. 6.G. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEES POSITION Oppose the reduction in motor vehicle registration fees. These fees generate almost 50% of the State Trunk Highway Use Trust Fund that finances highway construction and maintenance on state, county and city roads. If reductions in the fee occur, identify other funding sources to replace the lost revenue such as transferring the sales tax on motor vehicles to the Highway Trust Fund. 6.H. PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY POSITION The City supports the continued effort of the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to protect the authority of cities to maintain jurisdiction over municipal rights-of-way, to establish relevant criteria and to obtain reasonable compensation for its degradation. 6.1. TRANSPORTATION FUNDING POSITION The City strongly supports increased funding for transit and highways, both of which are a critical need in the metropolitan area. In addition, funding for mass transit including transit ways, light rail or heavy rail in existing corridors should be dedicated in a manner consistent with current highway funding. Funds allocated to the metropolitan area should be flexible so that the most efficient and cost effective transportation solution may be chosen and the main metropolitan problem (congestion relief) can be addressed. Additional long-term highway funding is needed to improve the 694/494 ring road around the Twin Cities area, especially the 35W/494 interchange that causes major traffic bottleneck. This improvement would provide major relief to Richfield's streets that are currently used to carry many regional trips. The City opposes any reduction to the sources of current constitutionally dedicated transportation funds including auto license tab fees, unless equivalent replacement funding is also constitutionally dedicated to current or a new multimodel transportation fund. If an alternative to the transit property tax in the metropolitan area is adopted, current opt-out transit systems should continue to be funded at comparable levels. CHALLENGE 7 - COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Richfield recognizes the need to protect our fragile environment. There are a number of issues of special concern regarding the environment including: 14 0 RESPONSE: 7.A WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION POSITION Support legislation that eliminates duplication between watershed districts and cities of authority, services and funding for surface water management. 7.13. HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE POSITION Richfield currently permits a system of open competition for residential waste haulers. Our perception is that people of Richfield believe that the current system works well but that there is a need to increase the convenience of household hazardous waste disposal We also agree that legislation should continue to fund educational and operational pilot program efforts on the subject of solid and hazardous waste disposal including alternatives for the disposal of household waste such as those promoted by the Household Hazardous Waste Reduction Project. 7.C. MANAGEMENT OF WETLANDS POSITION Support legislation that allows cities to maintain the wetlands in a diversified condition. Such legislation would allow cities to dredge and to pile the dredged material to form islands and paths without mitigation. Existing laws do not allow for islands to be created or to be maintained to the historic condition. CHALLENGE 8 - PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE The need to develop accountable governance systems which permit free and open access to the political process as well as developing affordable systems are priorities for our community. Of special interest to Richfield are the following issues: RESPONSE: 8.A. ELECTION ISSUES POSITION Support providing municipalities with computer access to the state voter registration system. Support legislation to authorize cities to allow election judges to direct that their pay be donated to a local charity or community non- profit organization of their choice and legislation to encourage more people to become election judges. 8.13. DEFINITION OF DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES POSITION There are four different types of local development agencies provided by state law. Housing and Redevelopment Authorities, Economic Development Authorities, Port Authorities, and Community Development Agencies all assist with similar and some different powers. The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority has both a housing and redevelopment function that the name alone most clearly communicates to the public. Richfield's economic development initiatives are still best communicated as a housing and redevelopment authority function. Discourage name changes; it tends to confuse the true identity, function, and historical basis for the local agency. 8.C. NEED FOR HRA COMMISSIONER POSITION Changes in federal regulation require that local housing agencies that receive federal monies, such as the Richfield HRA, must have a commissioner that benefits from local housing programs. One proposed solution is to change the number of HRA Commissioners from five to six with a change in state law. Richfield proposes two alternatives: 1) Establish a separate task force or 15 committee of benefiting program participants that make recommendations to the HRA when Section 8 program decisions are made. If (1) doesn't meet the federal requirements, then 2) allow the sixth HRA Commissioner to only serve at those times that decisions relating to federal programs funding and administration are being made by the HRA. The HRA may be eligible for a waiver from HUD on this requirement. However, for most HRA's, a change in state law is required that would affect Richfield. CHALLENGE 9 - CONTINUANCE AND AFFORDABILITY OF MUNICIPAL SERVICES There are a number of issues of particular interest to the City because they affect the affordability of City services. Those include: RESPONSE: 9.A. MAINTENANCE GARAGE FACILITIES/SITE INITIATE The City of Richfield has long been seeking a new,, expanded site for a city maintenance facility. Over the years, the City has conversed with Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) staff about a site on the west side of MAC property. The Richfield City Council has taken action directing staff to seek use of MAC property for a new maintenance facility. 9.13. UNFUNDED MANDATES POSITION The Legislature is encouraged to carefully review any additional mandates on city government. Every time a mandate is imposed, a cost is associated with meeting the new requirements. This cost must be absorbed by the City and, ultimately, the taxpayer. 9.C. PAY EQUITY POSITION The City supports efforts to eliminate any sex based differences in compensation to public employees but asks the Legislature to revise the Pay Equity Statute to limit the law's applicability to only full time employees. The rules used to compute pay equity for seasonal and part time employees generally do not support the basic pay equity policy. 9.13. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS POSITION The City supports legislation promoting the efficient and economical provision of employee benefits including life, health and dental care. The City specifically opposes legislation which would authorize employees or groups of employees to unilaterally select particular care providers. The City further asks that the Legislature not mandate or grant additional benefits to public employees. 9.E. PELRA POSITION The state should modify the definition of public employee under PELRA by removing the existing 14-hour/67 day requirement and replace it with a definition in which employees must work more than an annual average of 20 hours per week. Temporary or seasonal employees should not be included in this definition. The state should change public sector bargaining laws to require arbitrators to adhere to the pay equity law with regard to consideration of internal class comparisons. 16 9.F. RECOVERY OF D.W.I. ARREST COSTS INITIATE Richfield currently makes approximately 145 D.W.I. arrests annually. These arrests require police officer time during testing, booking and the court process. Additionally, cities are responsible for out of pocket expenses including prosecuting and correctional supervision cost. The total cost for the average D.W.I. conviction to the City of Richfield is $802, while the average fine for a D.W.I. defendant was $126. The City recovers only a portion of D.W.I. fines when levied and collected. The portion received by the City covers approximately 15% of the cost of arrests. Therefore, the more aggressive the City is in removing D.W.I. drivers the greater the financial burden on the City. The City should urge the Legislature to provide greater recovery of D.W.I. cost that would help resolve this problem. 9.G. WORTHLESS CHECKS POSITION The City urges the Legislature to support worthless check legislation. In the past, legislation has been introduced but never passed which would provide that any person who pays for a driver's license with a bad check shall have their driver's license revoked. If a person pays for license plates with a bad check, their motor vehicle registration certificate would be revoked. And finally, if a person would pay for a certificate of title with a bad check, the certificate of title would be revoked. When the liability on a bad check is discharged or payment made, the Department of Public Safety would reinstate the person's driver's license, motor vehicle registration certificate or motor vehicle certificate of title upon payment of a $20 fee. The City of Richfield each year is burdened with making good on bad checks that are paid for motor vehicle registration license fees. 9.H. CRIME PREVENTION POSITION Violence is increasing in urban areas and throughout the United States. While the police continue to respond and provide a number of programs, Richfield is stretched to the limit. The solution to this and other crime programs is prevention education. Furthermore, crime is mobile: many crimes are not committed by persons from Richfield. Because of this, it is not a Richfield problem but the state's. Therefore, the Legislature should continue to provide for innovative programs that will give Richfield and other communities the resources necessary to educate our citizens on good crime prevention and safety awareness programs. 9.1. STATE,BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE POSITION Prior to 1991, cities collected one-half percent surcharge on all building permits which were sent into the state. However, a large portion of that was returned to the local governments. Since 1991, the Governor, as part of his budget balancing bill, kept all surcharge moneys collected by local governments to help fund the Building Codes Division of the State Department of Administration. This resulted in Richfield losing between $5,000 and $10,000 annually. Richfield supports the LMC initiative to restore the excess fees generated by the surcharge which exceed the costs of the State Building Code Division to local governments. 17 9J. FIREARM TRANSFER PERMIT FEES POSITION The City urges the Legislature to enact a law that would enable cities to collect a fee for processing firearm transfer permits. 9.K. TELECOMMUNICATIONS POSITION The City supports the following position with respect to telecommunications: • The City strongly urges the preservation of the City's legal authority to negotiate, award and regulate cable television franchises under both Federal Telecommunications Act Title 7 (FTA) and Minnesota State Statutes Chapter 238. • The City strongly opposes proposed legislation in Senate File 2133/House File 2137 which would abolish Chapters 237 and 238 of the Minnesota Statutes and regulate cable television operators and telephone companies the same. That proposed legislation would revoke the City's authority to award cable television franchises, eliminates the City as a local resource to its citizens and the City's ability to receive direct support for community television and other provisions that need local community needs. Furthermore, the proposed legislation would have a negative financial impact on municipalities and citizens throughout the state. The infrastructure to regulate cable operators is already in place at the local level and is extremely effective. The proposed legislation would destroy this existing infrastructure and replace it with a cumbersome, expensive administrative agency at the state level. • The City respectfully requests that the State Legislature include the City, League of Minnesota Cities and the Minnesota Association of Community and Telecommunications Administrators in any discussions and hearings concerning cable regulation. 9.L. BLEACHER SAFETY LEGISLATION INITIATE Implement Minnesota HF878 by supporting a bill to fund the cost of bringing existing bleachers into compliance with the provisions of the act by January 1, 2001. The main focus of HF878 is to ensure that new and existing bleachers meet the minimum confinement requirements for the safety of all users. This law affects a great number of bleachers in the State of Minnesota and, hence, places a financial burden especially on local jurisdictions and school districts. CHALLENGE 10 -HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING AND COORDINATION The following legislative suggestions are derived from principally three sources: The Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council, The Richfield Response Team and the development of the Richfield FamiLink Community Resource Center as part of the Richfield Community Council/South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative. These suggestions are intended to build on the experience and goals of the above groups to create a human service delivery system which is more efficiently integrated, especially at the family and local levels. They also address issues and ideas which are not determined locally -- but rather at county, state and federal levels. Meeting human service needs will be an on-going issue for a considerable period of time in the future. While local communities try their best to address human service issues in collaboration with schools, social agencies and families, etc., they do not have many of the resources or the ultimate mandate to do so. At the same time they are at the cortex of the many factors which impinge on families and the community. In one way or another cities are forced to make choices to address human needs when they 18 do not have adequate resources to do so. It is incumbent upon the county, state and federal governments to reallocate available resources so communities can have the best possible chance to have positive outcomes in addressing human service issues. 10.A. INTERVENTION AND THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM POSITION Until recently, Hennepin County Children and Family Services opened about 50% of substantiated abuse/neglect cases for child protection services. Now, however, about 10 to 20% of substantiated cases are opened. The reason for this is that the threshold to open a case has been raised. The driving force behind this is to reduce out-of-home placement, e.g. cost containment. While the County is stressing early intervention/prevention, the high cost of out-of- home placement puts a drain on the resources of the child protection system and makes it difficult to serve other families in a more proactive manner. The fallacy of this approach is that some children still need to be removed from the home or they will end up in the criminal justice system and likely be incarcerated for years with no rehabilitation. This, in the end, ends up costing the taxpayer more in the long run. Recommendation • Divert some funds from the criminal justice system to out-of-home placement for younger siblings where there has been a pattern of older siblings and/or family members ending up in the criminal justice system. • Divert some funds for early intervention/prevention/treatment. 10.13. CHILD PROTECTION POSITION The issues described in the above section need to be addressed in various ways and at different levels. The following recommendations address some of the ways to address child protection issues. Recommendation • Sufficient Funds - Funds to support community involvement in child protection issues need to be appropriated or redistributed from existing resources. • To have the highest potential for success, the public agencies and entities receiving public funds should be mandated to decentralize their services and resources to maximize the potential for community-based approaches. 10.C. CHILD CARE POSITION Childcare is a critical necessity for those out of work or the working poor to lift themselves out of poverty. It will be a necessity for many families to enter the labor market as an alternative to public assistance. The State increased its share of day care funds in response to the Welfare to Work Initiative. Now we find families being placed on long waiting lists again. This indicates more funding is needed. Recommendation • Continue to increase funding for childcare to make it affordable to the working poor and families being required to enter the labor market as an alternative to public assistance. • Place a higher value on enabling parents and children to remain at home • to nurture their young children. • Establish childcare as part of a universal education guaranteeing early childhood education for all children. 19 • Provide funds/incentives to cities, schools, churches, agencies to operate . after-school hour programs, especially for the low-income working poor and two parent working families. • Increase the number of qualified staff to provide for the growing demand on childcare services. 10.D. DATA PRIVACY POSITION It appears that many professionals find data privacy a stumbling block in providing intervention services to children and families, particularly when families are resistant to professional help. These families can consume considerable amounts of time and energy on the part of professionals. Community Case Consultation Teams may be a format that could be expanded to provide quicker intervention strategies, particularly with uncooperative families. Recommendation • Revise data privacy laws or expand on the Community Case Consultation Team format (currently under the auspices of the County) to quickly bring the required resources together to resolve family situations where neglect/abuse are issues and the family resists outside help and refuses to sign data release forms. This would be helpful at the community level in dealing with neglect and abuse in community based approaches. 10.E. VOLUNTEERISM POSITION If local communities are expected to do more in helping to resolve critical issues and the expectation is that citizens provide their services voluntarily, • then local communities need funds/incentives to motivate, train and coordinate volunteers and volunteer activity. A more highly organized local community volunteer force would be a resource to help families/individuals to become a part of their community. Recommendation • The State or County should provide resources to utilize volunteers more effectively in local communities. 10.F. HEALTH CARE POSITION Health care like day care is a critical item for families to enter and stay in the work force. Recommendation • Continue to provide and expand Minnesota Care coverage for people currently eligible and for those who will be required to go to work (probably at lower paying jobs and possibly with no health care). 10.G. THIRD PARTY PAY POSITION The system that is now in existence for third party pay, particularly for mental health services, requires agencies to meet stringent requirements to access third party pay reimbursement. Many non-profit agencies providing critical human services are not eligible for third party pay because their staff does not meet established criteria. Recommendation • Family Services and Children's Mental Health Collaboratives should be able to access third party pay without undue cost and process. 20 10.H. RESOURCES FOR FAMILY SERVICES COLLABORATIVE POSITION The State Legislature has proposed funding Family Services Collaboratives over a five year span, e.g. full funding for the first three years with two-thirds funding in year four and one-third funding in year five. Recommendation • The State Legislature reaffirm its commitment to fund Family Services Collaboratives over a five-year period as originally proposed and consider an on-going level of funding at a one-third level based on the collaboratives' third year grant amount. • The State Legislature consider a study and/or legislative audit to determine whether or not LCTS/Revenue Enhancement funds are being utilized by communities as required by federal law and regulations. • The State Legislature reviews the functions and expectations of the State Family Services Collaboratives and their relationship to/with Revenue Enhancement/LCTS and determines how these two efforts can be more efficiently and economically connected for better service to families and children. 10.1. IMMIGRATION POSITION The immigrant population in Richfield and other communities is increasing constantly. Richfield Public Schools now have 27% students of various color, ethnic and cultural heritage. While English as a Second Language (ESL) is ;made available to both adults and students enrolled in school, it is not readily available to pre-school children. For the last couple of years between 100-135 pre-schoolers have been identified as needing language and other related education for preparation to enter school. Recommendation • Provide funds for schools, early childhood and family education and other qualified providers to prepare preschool children for entrance into kindergarten with ESL education, socialization and other related pre-school preparation activities. CHALLENGE 11 - MUNICIPAL LIQUOR OPERATIONS The following items may be introduced to the Legislature in 2000 that could directly affect the Richfield Liquor Operations. RESPONSE 11.A. WINE SALES POSITION There are strong indications that wine in the grocery stores will be introduced in 2000 by the Minnesota Grocers Association and/or possibly by one or two large grocery chains. This has a very negative effect on the profitability of current and future wine sales. The Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association (MMBA) and the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association are examining options to address the issue of illegal direct shipment of alcohol directly to Minnesota consumers. • Current Minnesota laws allow any winery licensed in a state which provides Minnesota wineries with equal reciprocal shipping privilege, to ship up to two cases of wine directly to a Minnesota resident. However, since there are no enforcement or recordkeeping 21 mechanisms in place, more than two cases per customer can and are being shipped to Minnesota consumers. • Internet websites are abundant. They will, and do, ship all types of alcohol directly to Minnesota residents. The MMBA also is opposing a 2000 legislative item that would allow farm wineries to open three retail wine/food establishments in any part of the state. There is no provision for local licensing authority. Basis for opposition includes: • Allows sale of food at an off-sale establishment - thereby opening the door for wine in grocery stores. • Bypasses local licensing authority. The MMBA expects this, or similar legislation, to be introduced in 2000. 0 • 22 • J AGENDA SECTION: PROP. ORDINANCE AGENDA ITEM # 4 REPORT # 33 STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: CHERYL KRUMHOLZ, ADMIN. ASST. NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: SAMANTHA ORDUNO, CITY MANAGER NAA&, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 11 SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: First reading of an ordinance relating to regular meetings of City Council; amending Subsection 205.01 of Richfield City Code and consideration of a resolution adopting rules of procedure and decorum for City Council meetings. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Approve first reading of an ordinance relating to regular meetings of City Council; amending Subsection 205.01 of the Richfield City Code and schedule the public hearing and second reading of the ordinance and approval of the resolution adopting rules of procedure and. decorum for City Council meetings for February 28, 2000. H. BACKGROUND At the Special City Council annual strategic planning session on January 8, 2000, the Council discussed the need for regularly scheduled workshop sessions (Study Sessions) on the first Monday of each month. The Council believed business could effectively be handled on an as-needed basis. rather than, continuing with the regular sessions. If a Study Session was-needed, it could be 0124studysession.doc held prior to a Regular City Council meeting. It was felt that this was the best utilization of staff and consultant resources. The Council requested the first reading of a proposed ordinance amendment to the City Code related to Council Study Sessions be presented for their consideration on January 24, 2000. If approved, the public hearing and second reading could be on February 28, 2000. On October 26, 1998 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8633 establishing rules of procedure and decorum for City Council meetings. Section 8, subd. 1 of that resolution establishes workshop sessions on the first Monday of each month If the proposed ordinance is approved for second reading, a new resolution stating that workshop meetings may be held at the call of the Mayor will be presented for Council approval on February 28, 2000. A draft new resolution is attached for Council review. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY I • Richfield City Code requires that every ordinance receive two readings before the Council prior to final adoption. The code also states the procedure for adoption of ordinances and resolutions shall conform to the requirements, of the City Charter. • Section 205, Subsection 205.01 of the Richfield City Code establishes regular meetings for the City Council. The current ordinance states regular Council meetings are held on the first, second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7 p.m. -at the City Hall. • Resolution No. 8633, Section 8, subd. 1 approved on October 26, 1998 establishes that the regular meeting of the City Council held on the first Monday of each month be a workshop meeting. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • First reading of the proposed amendment is necessary before a public hearing and second reading can be held. • If a public hearing and second reading are scheduled, legal notices will be prepared as required by the City Charter. • The rules of procedure and decorum provide an outline of appropriate measures for conduct of Council meetings. C. FINANCIAL • Better utilization of staff and consultant resources will result in cost savings over time. D. LEGAL • The City Attorney has prepared the proposed ordinance and resolution and will be available for discussion at the Council meeting. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Defer action on the proposed ordinance to another Council meeting Do not approve first reading of the ordinance • If action is not taken on this matter, Study Sessions on the first Monday of each month will continue. V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed ordinance relating to regular meetings of the City Council • Resolution adopting rules of procedure and decorum for City Council meetings VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None expected. • 0 ORDINANCE NO. 4-3 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL; AMENDING SUBSECTION 205.01 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD ORDAINS: Section 1. Subsection 205.01 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 205.01. Reaular meetinas. Regular meetings of the council are held on the second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. at the city hall. If any such Monday is a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next following day at the same hour and place. Sec. 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with section 3.09 of the Richfield City Charter. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 (L -t- CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE AND DECORUM FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WHEREAS, it is appropriate for the City Council to establish rules of procedure and decorum for council meetings and Board and Commission meetings; and WHEREAS, the Richfield City Code, section 205.13, subd. 2(c) provides that the City Council may adopt such special rules by ordinance or resolution from time to time as necessary; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to adopt these special rules of procedure and decorum. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Richfield, as follows: 1. The attached rules of procedure and decorum are hereby established. 2. These rules shall remain in effect until modified by resolution of the City 10 Council. 3. These rules shall be interpreted, wherever possible, so as to be consistent with the rules set forth in the City Code. In the case of any irreconcilable conflict between these rules and the rules in the City Code, the rules in the City Code shall prevail. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk 0 RULES OF PROCEDURE AND DECORUM CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA SECTION 1. PURPOSE Subd. 1. General. It is recognized that in order to enhance the concept of effective and democratic government, it is essential that a legislative body establish formal rules of procedure and decorum so that a true deliberative process will be observed and not disturbed. SECTION 2. GENERAL Subd. 1. Law. The City Charter, Ordinances and State Statutes governing the City Council shall be followed and supplemented by the Rules of Procedure and Decorum of the City Council Subd. 2. General Rules. In all matters of parliamentary procedures, the Council shall be governed by the latest printed edition of the STURGIS STANDARD CODE OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE as published from time to time except as modified by these rules and the rules set forth in Section 205 of the City Code. SECTION 3. PRESIDING OFFICER. Subd. 1. Who Presides. The Mayor shall preside at all meetings of the Council. In the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tern shall preside. The presiding officer shall have the power to preserve strict order and decorum at meetings, enforce the rules of procedure, and determine without debate, subject to the final decision of the Council on appeal, all questions of procedure and order. Subd. 2. ADDeal of the Rulina of the Presidina Officer. Any member of the Council may appeal from a ruling of the presiding officer. If the appeal is seconded, the member may speak once solely on the question involved and the presiding officer may explain the ruling, but no other Council Member shall participate in the discussion. The appeal shall be sustained if it is approved by a majority vote. Subd. 3. Riahts of the Presidina Officer. The presiding officer may speak on any question and make motions and second motions. SECTION 4.AGENDA Subd. 1. Matters for Consideration. Matters for Council action shall be submitted by members of the Council and residents to the City Manager. Subd.2. Preparation. An agenda of business for each regular meeting shall be prepared in the office of the City Manager and copies thereof delivered to each Council Member as far in advance of the meeting as time for preparation will permit. 0124studysession.doc Subd. 3. Order of Business at Reaular Meetings. At the hour appointed for the regular meeting of the City Council, the meeting shall be called to order by the presiding officer. If a quorum is present, the City Council shall then proceed with its business in the following manner: (a) approval of minutes of previous meeting; (b) presentations; (c) public comment opportunity; (d) agenda approval; (e) consent calendar; (f) public hearings, including ordinance hearings; (g) proposed ordinances; (h) resolutions; (i) administrative reports; (j) correspondence; and (k) other business. Subd.4. Varvina Order of Business. The presiding officer may vary the order of business. Subd. 5. Consent Aaenda. In the preparation of the agenda for a meeting, the City Manager may place certain items of business on a consent calendar. A member of the Council wishing to remove any item from the consent calendar may do so at the time that the consent calendar is reached on the general Council agenda. Any item removed from the consent calendar shall become one of the regular agenda items of the meeting and shall be taken up after the consent calendar. All items not so removed from the consent calendar may be passed by a single, non-debatable motion. Matters proposed by the City Manager for the consent agenda shall be those that the Manager deems to be of a routine, non-controversial nature. Subd. 6. Items Not on the Aaenda. The Council may consider items not appearing on the agenda as normal business if a Council Member does not raise an objection. If a Council Member raises an objection, a vote of the majority of the Council Members present shall determine the appropriateness of further consideration of the matter at that time. The Council may not take action on any item that requires public notice or hearing. Subd. 7. Public Participation. Members of the public may address the City Council. during: (a) Public hearings. (b) Public comment opportunity. The agenda for each regular Council meeting shall include an opportunity for members of the general public to appear and make comment to the Council on matters not appearing on the printed agenda. The City Council may by majority vote limit this portion of the meeting to thirty minutes. Individuals shall be requested to limit their individual comments to four minutes or less. Matters commented upon during.this period are not required to be considered as action items at the meetings at which they are introduced. q-? (c) Specific issues scheduled on the agenda, other than public hearings, if no Council Member raises an objection. If a Council Member raises an objection, a vote of the majority of Council Members present shall determine the appropriateness of accepting public comment on the matter under consideration. SECTION 5. VOTING Subd. 1. Procedure. The votes of the members on any ordinance, resolution or motion pending before the Council shall be by voice vote, unless the Mayor or any Council Member requests that a roll call vote be taken. The presiding officer shall call for a roll call vote whenever a voice vote of the Council is not clear as to the disposition of the action before the Council. Subd. 2. Abstention. A Council Member may be excused from voting on a matter properly before the council only with the unanimous consent of the other members present, unless the Member is required by law to abstain from voting. The Council Member must announce the Member's intention to abstain prior to the vote being taken. The clerk shall record the abstention as "Abstain-name." Subd. 3. Votina Order for Roll Call. The Secretary to the Council shall call for the vote in consecutive order of wards. The presiding officer shall always vote last. SECTION 6. RULES OF DECORUM 1191 Subd. 1. Council. While the Council is in session, the members must preserve order and decorum, and a member shall neither, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or the peace of the Council nor disturb any member while speaking or refuse to obey the orders of the presiding officer. Subd. 2. Recoanition. No person or member of the Council shall address the Council without being recognized by the presiding officer. Subd. 3. Discussion. At the request of any Council Member or the Mayor, Council discussion shall be limited as provided in this subdivision. When the rules of this subdivision are invoked, no member of the Council shall speak more than twice on any question, nor more than five minutes each time without consent of the Council Subd. 4. Staff. Members of the City staff shall observe the same rules of order and decorum as are applicable to the City Council. Subd. 5. Pertinent to Matter Under Debate. Members of the Council, staff and public shall confine remarks to the matter under debate. Subd. 6. Addressina the Council. Each member of the public addressing the Council shall step up to the microphone provided for the use of the public after being recognized by the presiding officer and give his/her name and address in an audible tone of voice for the records, state the subject to be discussed, and state who the speaker is representing if representing an organization or other ^O persons. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a whole and not to any member thereof. No person other than members of the Council and the person having the floor shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Council, without permission of the presiding officer. No question may be asked a Council Member or a member of the staff without the permission of the presiding officer. The presiding officer may impose a four-minute time limit on remarks by speakers, whenever in the presiding officer's judgment, a time limit is necessary in order to expedite the progress of the meeting or ensure the opportunity for other speakers to be heard. The City Council may by majority vote extend the time limit imposed by the presiding officer. Subd. 7. Spokesman for Group of Persons. In order to expedite matters and to avoid repetitious presentations, whenever any group of persons wishes to address the Council on the same subject matter, it shall be proper for the presiding officer to request that a spokesperson be chosen by the group to address the Council and, in case additional matters are to be presented by any other member of said group, to limit the number of such persons addressing the Council. Subd. 8. After Motion. After a motion has been made or a public hearing has been closed, no member of the public shall address the Council from the audience on the matter under consideration without first securing the permission to do so by a majority vote of the City Council. Subd.9. Conduct. Any member of the Council, staff or person indulging in personalities or making impertinent, slanderous, or profane remarks or who willfully utters loud, threatening or abusive language, or engages in any disorderly conduct which would impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of any meeting, hearing or other proceeding, shall be called to order by the presiding officer and, if such conduct continues, may at the discretion of the presiding officer, be ordered barred from further audience before the Council during that meeting. Subd. 10. Members of the Audience. No person in the audience shall engage in disorderly conduct such as hand clapping, stamping of feet, whistling, using profane language, yelling, and similar demonstrations, which conduct disturbs the peace and good order of the meeting. SECTION 7. ENFORCEMENTS OF DECORUM Subd. 1. Warninq. All persons shall, at the request of the presiding officer, be silent. If, after receiving a warning from the presiding officer, a person persists in disturbing the meeting, said officer may order the person removed from the meeting. If the person does not remove himself/herself, the presiding officer may order that the Sergeant-at-Arms remove the person. Subd. 2. Seraeant-at Arms. The Public Safety Director, or such member or members of the police department, shall be Sergeant-at-Arms of the Council meetings. The Public Safety Director or such member or _ members of the police department shall carry out all orders and instructions given by the presiding officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at the Council • meeting. Upon instruction of the presiding officer it shall be the duty of the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove from the meeting any person who intentionally disturbs the proceedings of the Council Subd. 3. Resistina Removal. Any person who resists removal by the Sergeant-at-Arms may be charged with violating City Ordinance. Subd. 4. Motions to Enforce. Any Council Member may move to require the presiding officer to enforce these rules and the affirmative vote of a majority of the Council shall require the presiding officer to do so. Subd. 5. Adiournment. In the event that any meeting is willfully disturbed by a person or group of persons so as that orderly conduct of the meeting is not feasible, and when order cannot be restored by the removal of individuals who are creating the disturbance, the meeting may be adjourned with the remaining business considered at the next regular meeting or at a special meeting called by the presiding officer. SECTION 8. WORKSHOP MEETINGS Subd. 1. General. Workshop meetings of the City Council may be held at the call of the Mayor. No official Council action will be taken at workshop meetings. Subd. 2. Rules of Procedure and Decorum. The Rules of Procedure and Decorum of the City Council shall be observed in workshops so far as they are applicable. SECTION 9. CAMERA AND RECORDING DEVICES Subd. 1. Use of Cameras and Recordina Devices Limited. Cameras, including television and motion picture cameras, electronic sound recording devices and any other mechanical, electrical or electronic recording devices may be used in the Council Chamber, but only in such a manner as will cause a minimum of interference with or disturbance of the proceeding of the Council. SECTION 10. SEPARABILITY Subd. 1. General. If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of these Rules of Procedure and Decorum is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. 0 AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: CONSENT CALENDAR 3M" 32 BETSY CHRISTENSEN, SUPPORT SERVICES MANAGER NAAE, TITLE DAN SCOTT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SAFETY NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: -? SIGNATURE 1 U ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of request by Church of the Assumption for a temporary on-sale 3.2 intoxicating malt liquor, itinerant place of amusement, itinerant food, and public dance licenses for the Sno- Ball family event to be held Saturday, January 29, 2000. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Council approval of the licenses, fees waived, for Saturday, January 29, 2000, for Church of the Assumption's Sno-Ball family event. II. BACKGROUND On December 16, 1999, Church of the Assumption submitted a request for a temporary license to serve 3.2 percent intoxicating malt liquor for their annual Sno-Ball family even on January 29, 2000. They also submitted a request for an itinerant place of amusement license, an itinerant food license and a public dance license for the event. They are requesting that any fees be waived as they are a religious organization. They will be serving such food items as sloppy joes, hot dogs, popcorn and soda. The Church of the Assumption has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations fot_safe and wholesome food handling. - 0124AssumptionS noBall .8m- l This event will take place from 6 p.m. until 10 p.m. There will be a private crew on duty to address any issues that may arise. 1111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • N/A B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to these licenses. • The applicant has supplied proof of liquor liability insurance to cover this event. • The City has previously issued similar licenses to the Church of the Assumption. C. FINANCIAL • N/A D. LEGAL • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. • The Council has previously granted similar licenses to the Church of the Assumption. V. ATTACHMENTS N/A VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None expected. is 0124AssumptionSno-Ball AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3L REPORT # 31 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: KATIA MEDVETSKI REDEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: BRUCE PALMBORG, COMM DEV DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: E SIGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: • ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of an Access Agreement for use of 7645 Lyndale Avenue and 7644 Garfield Avenue by Richfield Senior Housing, Inc. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of Access Agreement for use of 7645 Lyndale Avenue and 7644 Garfield Avenue by Richfield Senior Housing, Inc. prior to conveyance dates of properties to same. II. BACKGROUND Richfield Senior Housing, Inc. (Redeveloper) is proposing to undertake a redevelopment project in the Lyndale Gateway Project Area consisting of 130 units of senior apartments, 30 assisted living units and 38,000 square feet of office space. The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment with the Redeveloper on October 18, 1999 and subsequently, two supplemental contracts, with the most recent on January 18, 2000. The Second Supplement to the Contract for Private Redevelopment contemplates the conveyance of two City-owned properties located at 7645 Lyndale Avenue and 7644 Garfield Avenue to the Redeveloper as these properties are part of the project site area. On January 10, 2000, the Council held a public hearing and second reading' of a transitory ordinance to sell 7645 Lyndale Avenue to the Redeveloper. At the same 0124AccessAgmt meeting, the Council undertook a first reading of a transitory ordinance to sell 7644 Garfield Avenue to the Redeveloper. Due to certain procedural requirements related to the transitory ordinance sale process of the subject properties, the conveyance of the • properties to the Redeveloper encroaches upon time tables related to certain site work necessary to implement construction, such as environmental testing and soil testing, site preparation work including demolition of existing improvements, tree removal and excavation. In order for this work to occur, an Access Agreement is necessary so that the Redeveloper may enter the property and undertake certain work prior to the conveyance dates. The Access Agreement is attached for your reference. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council is requested to approve the attached Access Agreement so as to memorialize understandings and agreements with respects to the Redeveloper's access to the City property prior to the conveyance dates. • The Second Supplement to Contract for Private Redevelopment by and between the HRA and Redeveloper, dated January 18, 2000, requires the HRA to undertake actions necessary to induce the City to sell the City-owned properties to the Redeveloper. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The transitory ordinance process for the sale of the City-owned properties is underway. However, the timeframes within this process impede the conveyance of the City-owned properties to the Redeveloper in a timely manner, and as per the various obligations made under separate agreements related to the project. C. FINANCIAL • Section 4 of the Access Agreement stipulates that the City will be held liable to Redeveloper for certain expenses related to pre-conveyance activities under the Access Agreement should the City be unable to convey the City- owned properties to Redeveloper, unless such default is the result of Redeveloper's inability to perform it's obligations. D. LEGAL • The legal consequences go hand-in-hand with the financial stipulations enumerated above. I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) An alternative recommendation would be to not approve the Access Agreement and allow the transitory ordinance processes to complete. The Redeveloper would then be barred from entering the City-owned prior to the conveyance dates. They would not be able to perform on schedule. This would have financial and legal implications and would not be a show of good faith in bringing this project to fruition. • I V. ATTACHMENTS Access Agreement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING I?-- City Staff City/HRA Legal Counsel • Redeveloper Redeveloper's Legal Counsel • 0 3L-3 0 ACCESS AGREEMENT THIS ACCESS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") made this day of , 2000, by and between THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota body corporate and politic, of 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423 ("City") and RICHFIELD SENIOR HOUSING, INC., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, of 1900 West County Road E-2, Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 ("Redeveloper"). WHEREAS, Redeveloper and The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield (the "HRA") are parties to that certain Contract For Private Redevelopment dated October 18, 1999, Supplement to Contract for Private Redevelopment dated November 15, 1099, and Second Supplement to Contract for Private Redevelopment dated January 18, 2000 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Contract"). The Contract provides, among other things, that the HRA will convey certain real property (the "Redevelopment Property") to the Redeveloper for purposes of developing approximately 130 units of senior apartments, 30 assisted living units and 38,000 square feet of office space (collectively, the "Minimum Improvements"); and WHEREAS, City is the fee owner of certain real property contained within the Redevelopment Property and located in the City of Richfield, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, as more particularly described on the attached Exhibit A ("City Property"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Contract, the HRA has agreed to cause the City to convey the City Property to the Redeveloper in accordance with the City's City Charter; and WHEREAS, due to certain procedural requirements with which the City must comply, the conveyance of Lots 9 and 10 of the City Property may not occur until February 17, 2000, and the City may not be in a position to convey Lot 8 of the City Property until approximately March 22, 2000 (the "Conveyance Date(s)"); and WHEREAS, Redeveloper desires to commence construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property, including the City Property, prior to the Conveyance Date(s); and WHEREAS, the City has agreed that, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Redeveloper may enter upon the City Property prior to the Conveyance Date(s) for the purposes of conducting certain inspections including without limitation, environmental testing and soil testing (the "Inspections"), site preparation work including without limitation demolition of existing improvements, if any, tree removal and excavation ("Site Preparation Work"), and construction of the Minimum Improvements ("Construction"); and WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to memorialize their understandings and agreements with respect to Redeveloper's access to the City Property prior to the Conveyance Date(s). NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: is 3L- q Section 1. Access. Redeveloper, its agents and contractors, are hereby granted the right of access to enter upon the City Property to conduct the Inspections, to perform the Site Preparation Work and to begin the Construction on or about the City Property. Section 2. Compliance with Law. Inspections, Site Preparation Work and Construction on the City Property shall be completed in accordance with applicable local and state laws or ordinances. Section 3. Permits. Notification. Governmental Approvals. Redeveloper shall obtain, at its expense, all required permits or governmental approvals, if any, prior to the conducting of the Inspections, the Site Preparation Work or the Construction as provided in Section 1. City shall cooperate with Redeveloper and assist Redeveloper in obtaining such permits or approvals. Section 4. Indemnification: Non-Liability. Except as provided herein, Redeveloper shall indemnify and hold harmless City from and against any and all claims, damages, liabilities and expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees) for personal injury or property damage resulting from or relating to the Inspections, the Site Preparation Work and/or the Construction accruing prior to the Conveyance Date(s), including, without limitation, claims, damages, liabilities and expenses resulting from, caused or occasioned by, in whole or in part, the negligence or willful misconduct of Redeveloper, its agents, employees or invitees. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City shall be liable to Redeveloper for all losses, damages, costs or expenses incurred or suffered by Redeveloper with respect to the Site Preparation Work and Construction in the event the City Property is not ultimately conveyed by the City to the Redeveloper, unless such losses, damages, costs or expenses result from the failure of Redeveloper to perform its obligations under the Contract. 10 Section 5. Insurance. Redeveloper will obtain and maintain property damage, casualty, public liability, and workers' compensation insurance policies insuring itself and its contractors in such amounts and coverages as required by the HRA pursuant to the Contract, will name City as an additional insured under such policies, and will supply copies of certificates of such insurance to City prior to entry onto the City Property. Section 6. Costs and Expenses. Mechanic's Liens. Redeveloper shall provide to City, prior to commencement of any Site Preparation Work or Construction on the City Property, the name and address of any third party contracted to perform any Site Preparation Work or Construction on the City Property. Redeveloper shall promptly pay or shall cause to be paid any and all costs and expenses associated with the Site Preparation Work and Construction, and will not permit any lien or liens for labor and/or materials ("Mechanic's Lien") of any other type to be filed against the City Property as a result of any of the work referred to in Section 1 of this Agreement. Section 7. Entire Agreement. This writing constitutes the final expression of the parties' agreement and it is a complete and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions of that Agreement with respect to the subject matter set forth in this Agreement. Section 8. Modifications. This Agreement may only be amended by a subsequent written agreement executed by authorized representatives of all parties to this Agreement. Section 9. State Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the internal laws of the State of Minnesota. • 2 32--s- Section 10. Waiver. Any waiver by any party of any provision or condition of this Agreement shall not be construed or deemed a waiver of any other provision or condition of this Agreement, nor a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same provision or condition. Section 11. Notices. All written notices, demands, writings, supplements, or other documents which are required or permitted by the terms of this Agreement to be given to any party shall be deposited in the regular first class United States mail at any Unites States Post Office or any branch United States Post Office, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties at the addresses hereinafter set forth and shall be effective the day following their deposit: City: The City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 ATTN: John Stark With a copy to: Corrine H. Thomson, Esq. Kennedy & Graven, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Redeveloper: Richfield Senior Housing, Inc. 1900 West County Road E-2 Arden Hills, Minnesota 55112 ATTN: Kristi Olson, President With a copy to: Paul W. Anderson, Esq. Messerli & Kramer P.A. 1800 Fifth Street Towers 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Section 12. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, any one of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Section 13. Headings. Section headings used in this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not affect the construction of this Agreement. Section 14. Expiration. This Agreement shall expire on the last of the Conveyance Date(s). • 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written. OWNER: REDEVELOPER: THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, RICHFIELD SENIOR HOUSING, INC., MINNESOTA, a Minnesota a Minnesota nonprofit corporation public body corporate and politic By: By: Printed Name: Kristi Olson Title: President By: Printed Name: Title: • • 4 • • • EXHIBIT A ACCESS AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA AND RICHFIELD SENIOR HOUSING, INC. Legal Description Lots 8, 9 and 10, Block 7, Sunset Terrace, according to the recorded plat thereof; Hennepin County, Minnesota 5 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 3K REPORT # 30 is 0 r 7 4 :' 3 E REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 24, 2000 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: - / ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution opposing Senate File 2133/House File 2137 pertaining to preserving Cable TV Franchise Authority. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution opposing Senate File 2133/House File 2137 III. BACKGROUND I The City of Richfield has been granted legal authority to negotiate, award and regulate cable television franchises both under the Federal Telecommunications Act Title Six and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238. The City has regulated its cable television franchise very responsibly, serving as a local resource to resolving customer service issues. Richfield has further insured that Time- Warner, it's franchisee, has identified needs and interests in the community such as local community programming, customer service and emergency alert requirements. The franchise agreement in effect between the City of Richfield and Time-Warner also i provides for the continuation of franchise fees to the City of Richfield consistent with the original franchise agreement negotiated in the 1980s. 0124franchise 3/<-/ The City has become aware through the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) and the Minnesota Association of Community and Telecommunications Administrators (MACTA) that SF2133/HF3137 which will be considered in the next Legislative Session would abolish chapters 237 and 238 of Minnesota Statutes and regulate cable television operators and telephone companies the same. The proposed legislation would revoke the City's authority to award cable television franchisees, eliminate the City as a local resource to its citizens and remove the City's ability to receive direct support for community television and other provisions that meet local community needs. Cable operators providing cable service are regulated differently than telephone companies. Telephone companies act as common carriers under existing Federal and State law. Common carriers are regulated under Title Two of the Telecommunications Act and Chapter 237 of the Minnesota Statutes. Cable operators, on the other hand, are regulated under Title Six of the Federal Communications Act and Chapter 238 of the Minnesota Statutes. There is no need for the proposed legislation and no other state has enacted such legislation. Further, it has not been demonstrated that local government's role in cable franchising impedes the ability of cable and telecommunications companies to offer full and competitive services. The proposed legislation would violate the purpose of the Federal Telecommunications Act of establishing franchise procedures and standards that encourage the growth of cable systems and assure cable systems are responsive to needs and interests of local communities. It is the City's position that Richfield has a significant interest in retaining its ability to franchise companies providing cable television services and opposes any legislation that would revoke this authority. Proposed legislation such as SF 2133/HF 2137 propose to eliminate Chapter 238. Staff believes such action is premature. Instead, the City would request that the State Legislature carefully study the dynamics of Federal and State cable regulation prior to passing any new legislation. Finally, the City would also request that the State Legislature include cities such as Richfield, the LMC and MACTA in all discussions and hearings concerning the regulation of cable television. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City of Richfield has negotiated a multi year cable franchise ordinance in good faith with Time-Warner as part of the five-city Southwest Suburban Cable Commission. • This proposed legislation would undercut that franchise. • The City and Richfield citizens currently receive valuable benefits from the current franchise provisions. B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • This bill will be heard in this year's legislative session. • This resolution should be forwarded to Richfield Legislative delegation prior to that time. C. FINANCIAL I The City currently receives roughly $200,000 annually from cable television franchise fees. i • These fees are used to offset General Fund expenditures pertaining to public information issues and government access programming such as Council Meeting cablecasts. D. LEGAL • None IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • Do not take a position regarding this proposed legislation V. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Resolution VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None expected. • 0 3X- 3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OPPOSING SF 2133/HF 2137 WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has been granted the legal authority to negotiate, award and regulate cable television franchises under both Federal Telecommunications Act Title VI (FTA) and Minnesota Statutes Chapter 238; and WHEREAS, the City has regulated its cable television franchise responsibly and reasonably, serving as a local resource to resolving customer service issues; and WHEREAS, the City has ensured that its cable operator has identified needs and interests in the community such as local community programming, customer service and emergency alert requirements; and WHEREAS, the City has worked with municipalities throughout the State through both the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) and the Minnesota Association of Community and Telecommunications Administrators (MACTA) to further the benefits of cable television to local communities and to address local concerns regarding cable television; and WHEREAS, proposed legislation, SF2133/HF 2137, would abolish Chapters 237 and 238 of Minnesota Statutes and regulate cable television operators and telephone companies the same. The proposed legislation will revoke the City's authority to award cable television franchises, eliminate the City as a local resource to its citizens, and remover the City's ability to receive direct support for community television and other provisions that meet local community needs; and WHEREAS, cable operators providing cable service are regulated differently than telephone companies, which act as common carriers under existing federal and state law. Common carriers are regulated under Title II of the FTA and Chapter 237 of Minnesota Statutes. Cable operators are regulated under Title VI of the FTA and Chapter 238 of Minnesota Statutes; and WHEREAS, there is no need for the proposed legislation, and no other State has enacted such legislation. It has not been demonstrated by any means that local governments' role in cable franchising impedes in any manner the ability of cable and telecommunications companies to offer full and competitive services; and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation will violate the purpose of the FTA of establishing franchise procedures and standards which encourage the growth and development of cable systems and which assure that cable systems are responsive to the needs and interest of the local community. Nor will it promote competition in cable communications and minimize unnecessary regulation that would impose an undue economic burden on cable systems; and 3x-? WHEREAS, the proposed legislation would actually increase a regulation forcing the Department of Commerce and the Public Utilities Commission to dramatically increase staff and regulate cable, even though these agencies have no background or experience in regulating the cable industry; and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation will have a,negative financial impact on municipalities and citizens throughout the State. The infrastructure to regulate cable operators is already in place at the local level and is extremely effective. The proposed legislation would destroy the existing infrastructure and replace it with a cumbersome, expensive administrative agency at the State level; and WHEREAS, the proposed legislation does not adequately address, Open Access, protection against Redlining, local infrastructure to address service complaints, destruction of existing contracts or agreements or PEG programming; and WHEREAS, the City has expended considerable time and resources negotiating a new cable franchise that meets the community's needs. The City has also worked closely with neighboring jurisdictions to enter into a joint powers commission to share resources and jointly develop local programming and related activities to further community needs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The City of Richfield has a significant interest in retaining its ability to franchise companies providing cable television services and is hereby opposed to any legislation that would revoke this authority. 2. That any legislation eliminating Chapter 238 at this time is premature. The City Council respectfully requests the State Legislature to carefully study the dynamics of federal and state cable regulation prior to passing any new legislation. 3. The City Council respectfully requests the State Legislature to include the City, the LMC and the MACTA in all discussions and hearings concerning cable regulation. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of January 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: 0 Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 3J REPORT # 29 is • t . ..- REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE STEVEN L. DEVICH, ADMINISTRATIVE S VIC DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE IGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of changing the 2000 Board of Equalization start time. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a change in the start time of the May 1, 2000 Board of Review Meeting to 6:00 p.m. • II. BACKGROUND On January 10, the City Council voted to convene the year 2000 Board of Equalization on May 1 at 7 p.m. Since that time, staff has become aware that at least one Board of Equalization member has a scheduling conflict which would necessitate. that the Board start time be moved to 6 p.m. The City Council has the discretion to convene the Board at any time it chooses. The Council may act on this to honor the request to change the start time or keep the time as previously established. 1111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The City Council is required to conduct a Board of Equalization meeting each year. • The Board of Equalization for Richfield has traditionally been convened on the first Monday in May. This date is suggested by the County Assessor. 0124Board • The start time of the meeting has typically been 7 p.m. However, the City Council has the authority to establish the start time when it deems appropriate, and at least one Board Member has a scheduling conflict with a 7 p.m. start time. . B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The City must report its Board of Equalization meeting date and time to the County by January 24, thus it is important that this item be handled on January 24. C. FINANCIAL • NA D. LEGAL I • The City has the legal responsibility to schedule and conduct a Board of Equalization hearing each year. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The City Council may leave the Board of Equalization start time as previously adopted by the City Council • The City Council may elect to establish a different start time than the one previously approved or the one proposed here. V. ATTACHMENTS None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None expected. 45 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 31 REPORT # 28 • J JANUARY 24, 2000 • REPORT PREPARED BY: REPORT PRESENTER: STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: D. ANDERSON. ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN NAME, TITLE MIKE EASTLING. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: &4-zz INAME, TITLE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a resolution accepting the Conditional Use License Agreement for use of Hennepin County's Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB) and authorizing the City Manager to execute the 2000 Agreement and future Conditional Use License Agreements for use of the County's EPDB. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: BY MOTION • ADOPT THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE EXTENSION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE CITY OF RICHFIELD'S USE OF THE COUNTY'S ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATA BASE THROUGH DECEMBER 319 2000 AND INTO THE FUTURE, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THIS AND FUTURE EXTENSIONS OF THE CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGREEMENT. i 0124GISagreement II. BACKGROUND 1001, ? The City of Richfield has been using Hennepin County's Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB) in conjunction with the Geographical Information System (GIS). Information from the County used by the City includes parcel or property information, which is used for such things as mailing lists, mapping and planning. In the past, City staff has executed a License Agreement which reserves proprietary interests for the data to the County. To continue use of the information, the Agreement must be extended. Hennepin County is offering an extension through December 31, 2000. The extension, present and future, requires action by the Council authorizing extension of the Agreement and execution of the extension. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION I A. POLICY • The City has previously entered into Conditional Use License Agreements with the County for use of EPDB. • Past practice has authorized the City Manager to execute documents on behalf of the City. I B. CRITICAL ISSUES I • The County is currently allowing the City to use EPDB although the Conditional Use License Agreement has expired. Because the previous Agreement expired December 31, 1999, Council is asked to take action at the January 24, 2000 Council meeting. I C. FINANCIAL • It would be extremely difficult and costly for the City to redevelop and maintain the information already available through the County. I D. LEGAL NA I IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Do not accept the resolution. However, this may make it difficult to execute a Conditional Use License Agreement for use of County EPDB in the future. It would be extremely difficult, time consuming and costly for the City to redevelop and maintain the information already available through the County. • Authorize someone other than, or in addition to, the City Manager to execute the current and future Hennepin County Conditional Use License Agreement for use of County EPDB. 0124GISagreement 3? O-L V. ATTACHMENTS Resolution Approving Extension(s) of the Hennepin County Conditional Use License Agreement allowing the City to use EPDB and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute such Extensions of the Hennepin County Conditional Use License Agreement. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING NA 0 • 0124GISagreement ?T3 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENSION(S) OF THE WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY CONDITIONAL USE LICENSE AGREMENT RELATING TO USE OF ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATA BASE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID EXTENSION(S) WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to make use of the Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB), a computerized system of parcel information for Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, prior to use of said EPDB by City personnel, a Conditional Use License Agreement, required by Hennepin County, must be executed by the City; and WHEREAS, said Conditional Use License Agreement has been executed but must now be extended for continued use of said EPDB by the City; and WHEREAS, the Agreement allows the City access to Hennepin County electronic data to be used in Geographical Information System (GIS) functions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: • Extension(s) of the Conditional Use License Agreement for use of the Electronic Proprietary Data Base (EPDB) is/are hereby approved. • The City Manager is hereby authorized to execute said Extension(s). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of January, 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk s 0124GISagreement AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3H REPORT # 27 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: RICK BEANE, GARAGE SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ® p4X525?> SIGNATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a purchase of squad cars in excess of $25,000. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion • Approve a purchase of five new squad cars to Superior Ford Inc., for the total sum of $103,932.50. II. BACKGROUND Five full size sedans (Units No. 9892, 9893, 9894, 9895 & 9896) being used by the Public Safety Department are scheduled to be replaced in 2000. All five of the squad cars currently in use were purchased in 1998, and all will be fully depreciated in 2000. The extent and nature of the use of squad cars indicates a two-year replacement program. Purchase of the new vehicles 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 vehicles. The low bidder for the type of vehicle required is then awarded a contract to supply vehicles to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. 012400SQUADS 3N-1 Superior Ford Inc. submitted the low bid for the new 2000 Ford Crown Victoria police package. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. • Superior Ford, Inc. submitted the lowest bid to the State of Minnesota. • The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. B. CRITICAL ISSUES N/A C. FINANCIAL I • The approved 2000 budget contains $120,000 for this purchase. • Actual cost per marked squad car in 1998 was $20,160. The per-squad price for 1999 was $20,637; for 2000 it will be $20,749 per squad (plus a delivery charge of $7.50 each), or $103,932.50 total. • Upon delivery of the vehicles, charges for transfer of police equipment such as radios and logo applications will be deducted from remaining funds budgeted for this purchase. • The revised 2000 budget will be adjusted to show actual cost once completed. D. LEGAL N/A E. TIMING I • Approval at the January 24, 2000 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new squad cars. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may delay approval for one Council meeting. • No action by Council on this purchase will eventually compromise safety for police officers driving old squad cars. V. ATTACHMENTS None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None. AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3G REPORT # 26 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: RICK BEANE, GARAGE SUPERVISOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: Q ?r ? e SIqVATURE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of purchase for a new Ford F250 4X4 pickup truck for use by the Public Safety Fire division. I II. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion • Approve a purchase in the sum of $24,880.50 to C&M Ford Sales, Inc. for a new pickup truck for use by the Public Safety Fire division. BACKGROUND Unit No. 8816, a 1988 GMC 4X4 pickup truck currently in use by the Public Safety Fire division is fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2000. Purchase of a replacement vehicle 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 vehicles. The low bidder for the type of vehicle required is then awarded a contract to supply vehicles to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. 0124004X4PU 18&-/ C&M Ford Sales, Inc. submitted the lowest bid for a new 2000 Ford F250 4X4 extended cab pickup truck. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. • Although at first glance this purchase falls under the $25,000 requirement, funds for two Fire Division vehicles were lumped together in anticipation of a single vendor as a line item of $54,000. • The City of Richfield participates in the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. • C&M Sales, Inc. submitted the low bid for the type of vehicle requested. B. CRITICAL ISSUES N/A C. FINANCIAL • The approved 2000 Garage Motor Pool budget contains $54,000 for two Fire utility vehicles. (The other Fire vehicle is presented for consideration on a separate Council letter, as the vendor for that vehicle is different.) • The revised 2000 budget will be adjusted to show the additional $127 to purchase the two utility vehicles from anticipated savings on other Capital Outlay purchases (such as squad cars). D. LEGAL N/A E. TIMING I • Approval at the January 24, 2000 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new vehicle. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Council may delay approval for one Council meeting with no major adverse effect. • No action by Council on this purchase will interrupt replacement schedules in the motor pool, and eventually cost more to keep depreciated vehicles in safe operating condition. V. ATTACHMENTS None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None. AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # _3F REPORT # --25 STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: RICK BEANE, GARAGE SUPERVISOR NAME TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ® &26 SIGNATURE Er ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of a purchase in excess of $25,000 of a new vehicle for use by the Public Works Engineering Division. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion • Approve the purchase, from Superior Ford, Inc. in the sum of $28,471.75, of a new Ford 4X2 Ford Excursion for use by the Engineering Division. II. BACKGROUND Unit No. 367, a 1994 Ford Aerostar van currently in use by the Public Works Engineering Division, is fully depreciated and scheduled to be replaced in 2000. Purchase of a replacement vehicle 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 vehicles. The low bidder for the type of vehicle required is then 40 awarded a contract to supply vehicles to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. 012400ENGVAN Superior Ford, Inc. submitted the low bid of $28,471.75 for a 4X2 fo r doo r Ford Excursion for use by the Engineering Division. • III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. • The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. • Superior Ford, Inc. submitted the lowest bid to the State of Minnesota for type of vehicle required. B. CRITICAL ISSUES N/A C. FINANCIAL • The approved 2000 Garage Motor Pool budget contains $28,000 for the purchase of the of the Engineering vehicle. • The revised 2000 budget will be adjusted to show the additional $471.75 for this vehicle from anticipated savings on other Capital Outlay purchases (such as the squad cars). • D. LEGAL N/A E. LEGAL I • Approval at the January 24, 2000 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new vehicles. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • Council may delay approval for one Council meeting without any major adverse effect. • No action by Council on this purchase will interrupt replacement schedules in the motor pool, and eventually cost the City more money to keep depreciated vehicles in safe operating condition. V. ATTACHMENTS None. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None. • AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3E REPORT # 24 * =00a STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: RICK BEANE, GARAGE SUPERVISOR NAAE, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: U I &IGNATURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: [Consideration of a purchase for a Public Safety Fire vehicle in excess of $25,000. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion • Approve a purchase, to Superior Ford Inc. in the total sum of $29,247.50, for a new 4X4 Ford Excursion for use by the Public Safety Fire Division. IL BACKGROUND Unit No. 3777, a 1987 Chevy Suburban currently in use by the Public Safety Fire division, is fully depreciated and due to be replaced in 2000. Under this program, the State of Minnesota solicits bids from a variety of dealers for specific motor pool vehicles. The low bidder for the type of vehicle required is then awarded a contract to supply vehicles to the participating members of the Cooperative Purchasing Program at the lowest possible price. The City of Richfield participates in this program. Superior Ford Inc. submitted the lowest bid for a new 4X4 four-door Ford Excursion for use by the Fire Division. 012400FIREVEH I A. POLICY I ?C ` • City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. Two utility vehicles for the Fire Division were lumped together as a line item in the budget for $54,000. The vendor for the pickup truck is not Superior Ford. • The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. • Superior Ford, Inc. submitted the lowest bid to the State of Minnesota for the type of vehicle required. B. CRITICAL ISSUES N/A C. FINANCIAL • The approved 2000 Garage Motor Pool budget contains $54,000 for the purchase of two Fire Division utility vehicles. The other Fire vehicle is up for consideration on a separate Council Letter, as the vendor for that vehicle was different. • The revised 2000 budget will be adjusted to show the additional $127 to purchase the two vehicles from anticipated savings on other Capital Outlay purchases (such as squad cars). D. LEGAL N/A E. TIMING I • Approval at the January 24, 2000 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new vehicles. III. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • Council may delay approval for one Council meeting without any major adverse effect. • No action by Council on this purchase will interrupt replacement schedules in the motor pool, and eventually cost more to keep depreciated vehicles in safe operating condition. IV. ATTACHMENTS None. V. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING None. 8 AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3D REPORT # 23 9 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: TOM FOLEY, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MIKE EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NA&E, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: L/ / / SIGNATUIPE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: V _ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of agreement between the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (The MAC) related to land acquisition for improvements at the intersection of 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77 (TH 77). 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion • Authorize the City Manager and Mayor to sign the right of way agreement between the City of Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission related to land acquisition for the required right-of-way for the west ramps at the intersection of 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77. • Authorize the City Manager and Mayor to sign the revised Memorandum of Understanding among the City of Richfield, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Airports Commission related to the construction of a new interchange at 66th Street and Trunk Highway 77. 49 II. BACKGROUND 0124MAC-ROWagree1 3D-J • • The agreement now under consideration focuses on the required right-of-way for the west side ramps of the 66th Street/TH 77 interchange. This right of way agreement was developed consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to detail the responsibilities of both The MAC and the City in acquiring the property needed to construct the new interchange at 66th Street. The MAC has asked that a new whereas provision be added to the previously Council approved Memorandum of Understanding on the 66th Street/TH 77 interchange project. The wording would state that this improvement is not considered a revenue diversion activity but rather work that is directly related to airport operations. • The proposed right of way agreement contains the following provisions: ? City of Richfield ? Administers the right of way purchases and relocation of residents and businesses needed to build the new interchange. ? Receives from The MAC all funds needed to purchase the necessary right of way and provide relocation services through a reimbursement process. ? Gains fee title to remnant land west of TH 77 for redevelopment purposes. ? Agrees to pay The MAC the full cost of acquiring the land if the City secures funds from the state or the federal government for this purpose. ? If state or federal funds do not become available to reimburse The MAC for all acquisition costs, the City agrees to pay The MAC the fair market value to purchase the remnant land west of TH 77. ? Has the right of first refusal to pay The MAC fair market value for the remnant land after five years from the project completion date if the City is unable to secure redevelopment of the site. The City also agrees to pay The MAC 5.462% interest per year on the fair market value of the land from the time the construction of the interchange project is complete. The Minnesota Department of Transportation will determine the completion date. •3 The MAC ? Reimburses the City in a timely manner for the cost, estimated at $7.0 million, to acquire land for the new interchange and relocate the occupants. ? Has the right to sell its interest in the remnant land five years after project completion if the City is unable to redevelop the land. Has the right to review an offer to purchase any property if the offer exceeds by ten percent the value established by the City's appraisers. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY On August 9, 1999 the City agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City, The MAC and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). The MOU is not a binding agreement but it expresses the intent of the three participating agencies on the measures they will take to improve the interchange. A minor housekeeping revision has been requested by The MAC. B. CRITICAL ISSUES NA C. FINANCIAL I 3 ,c; • No City of Richfield general funds are scheduled to be used to implement this agreement. • If the City wants to buy back some of the remnant parcels of land, the agreement allows for the buy back at market rate. D. LEGAL I • The City Attorney drafted the proposed right-of-way agreement. E. TIMING I • If Council approves the right of way agreement and the additional language for the Memorandum of Understanding, land acquisition may begin as soon as March 2000. If the Council delays action, land acquisition will be delayed. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • Do not authorize execution of the agreement. However, for improvements to be made to the 66th Street and TH 77 interchange, the agreement is necessary for land acquisition to begin. • Make revisions to the proposed agreement. However, the City Attorney and City staff have reviewed the agreement and believe that the agreement adequately addresses the City's concerns. V. ATTACHMENTS • Proposed Agreement by and between the City of Richfield and The Metropolitan Airports Commission VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING NA 0 3 • DRAFT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as to this day of , by and between the CITY OF RICHFIELD, a Minnesota municipal corporation, ("Richfield") and THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION, a , ("The MAC"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on , , Richfield and The MAC entered into that certain document entitled Memorandum of Understanding Between the Minnesota Department of Transportation, The Metropolitan Airports Commission and the City of Richfield (MOU"); and WHEREAS, the MOU was intended to establish the framework for subsequent enforceable agreements between the parties to the MOU for a construction project to reconstruct the 66th Street/Trunk Highway 77 Interchange including bridge widening and 66th Street widening, all as more fully described in the MOU ("Project"); and WHEREAS, the MOU contemplated a supplemental agreement between Richfield and The MAC, to address the construction of the west-side ramps, and the financing of the cost of such improvements. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and mutual obligations of the parties contained herein, each of them does hereby represent, covenant and agree with the other as follows. 1. Richfield's Obligation. Richfield shall acquire, in its name, fee title to the parcels of land necessary for the required right-of-way for the west side ramps, which will be constructed by The MAC in accordance with the plans and specifications and construction timetable that will be contained in the tri-agency cooperative construction agreement to be entered into by the parties to the MOU. 2. Fundina. The MAC agrees to provide Richfield the funds necessary finance the cost of said right-of-way acquisition. The cost of such acquisition was estimated in the MOU to be $7,000,000, however, the actual amount may be more or less. The parcels to be acquired are described in the attached Exhibit A. The parties agree that the costs to be funded by The MAC will be the actual costs incurred, expended or committed by Richfield including without limitation, costs for the following: 40 • Purchase price for lands acquired whether by voluntary purchase or by condemnation. • Relocation payments made as the result of such acquisitions. JBD-171566 4 RC145-343 • Title and appraisal costs • Filing, service and commissioner fees in condemnation actions. • Real estate taxes or installments of special assessments that are required to be paid as a result of condemnation. (Subject to credit for Richfield share) • Recording filing fees and deed tax for all real estate transfers. • Richfield consultant, legal and staff costs. • Property maintenance costs following closing and prior to demolition. 3. Timina of The MAC Pavments. Payments required to be made hereunder by The MAC shall be due and payable as follows: (i). The MAC payments to Richfield for land purchase price, quick-take deposits, and relocation benefits will be made not later than the time on which Richfield is required to make the payment or the deposit, provided however, that Richfield shall be obligated to give The MAC not less than ten working days notice of such payment together with customary documentation reasonably supporting such request. (ii). The MAC payments to Richfield for all other costs shall be made not later than 30 days following the date that The MAC has received evidence from Richfield that such costs have been incurred committed or expended, together with customary documentation reasonably supporting such request. 4. Voluntarv Purchase and Relocation Benefit Pavments-Prior Review by MAC. Richfield will notify The MAC whenever it intends to enter into a purchase agreement, provide relocation assistance, or settle a pending condemnation action for amounts which exceed 110% of the value placed upon such matter by Richfield's appraisers or relocation consultants. The MAC shall then have ten days from the date of such notice to approve or disapprove. Failure to respond shall be deemed as disapproval. Upon disapproval, The MAC's obligation shall be limited to the amount that does not exceed 110%. Richfield shall select its appraisers, review appraisers and relocation consultants from consultant lists maintained by the Minnesota Department of Transportation for those purposes. 5. Repayment. Richfield shall repay the advanced funds to The MAC at the time Richfield receives the funds provided for by Laws of Minnesota, 1999, Chapter 243, Article 16, Section 35; or within 60 days from the date that Richfield receives funds from any other source that Richfield determines to be in lieu of such funds. The repayment. obligation will include interest at the annual rate of 5.462% commencing on the date that the Project construction is complete as determined by Mn/DOT. 6. Restriction on Remnants. Until such time as repayment is made, Richfield may not make sell or offer for sale, or otherwise encumber or pledge such remnants without the consent of The MAC. The MAC agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold consent, and will consent if Richfield pays The MAC an amount equal to the fair market value of the remnant to be sold or encumbered. If the parties are unable to agree on the fair market value of the remnant parcel, such value will be determined by an appraiser selected by The MAC from the Minnesota Department of Transportation • approved list of appraisers. Proceeds from any sale under this paragraph 6 up to the total amount of The MAC funds paid to Richfield under paragraph 2, but less any JBD-171566 5 RC145-343 payments made to The MAC under paragraph 7, together with accrued interest shall be paid to The MAC and shall be credited to Richfield's repayment amount. 7. Comoellina Sale. In the event that the repayment funds are not available within five years following completion of the Project, Richfield agrees to allow The MAC to provide for the sale of all or part of the remaining remnant parcels; and agrees to sign all quit claim deeds and other documents necessary to accomplish such sales. It is understood that any such sales will be AS IS, WHERE IS, and without any warranty or representation on the part of Richfield. The MAC also agrees that Richfield shall have the right of first refusal with respect to any such sale, provided that such right is exercised within 30 days following the date that The MAC notifies Richfield of the receipt of a bona fide offer. Proceeds from any sale under this paragraph 7 up to the total amount of The MAC funds paid to Richfield under paragraph 2, but less any payments made to The MAC under paragraph 6, together with accrued interest shall be paid to The MAC, and shall be credited to Richfield's repayment amount. 7. Limitation on Repavment Obliaation. It is understood that the only sources for repayment are the funds described in paragraph 3 above and the sale proceeds described in paragraphs 6 and 7 above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RICHFIELD By Samantha Orduno Its City Manager By Martin Kirsch Its Mayor THE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION By Jeffrey Hamiel do Its Director JBD-171566 6 RC145-343 S EHO STATE OF MINNESOTA ss.. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of by Samantha Orduno and the Martin Kirsch, the City Manager and Mayor respectively of the City of Richfield a municipal corporation, under the laws of Minnesota by and on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ss.. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of by Jeffrey Hamiel, Director of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, a under the laws of by and on behalf of said Notary Public • JBD-171566 7 RC145-343 RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPACTED LEGEND 1` OWNER'S NAME ,ADDRESS PROPERTY1 STREET NAME OWNER'S NAME PROPERTY IWWAM D. ELAINE (ADDRESS I STREET NAME rrr I 6301 i CEDAR AVE. S G W. RONALD ET. AL -TRUSTEES I 6520 I CEDAR AVE. S. M.J. & H.M. SCHERLING 1 6311 1 CEDAR AVE. S. G. W. RONALD ET. AL-TRUSTEES I 6528 I CEDAR AVE. S. ? MARVIN PAINTS INC. 1 5315 1 CEDAR AVE. S. ' L.R. DEGIDIO JR. AL-TRUSTEES 1 6501 1 CEDAR AVE. S. STEPHEN 0. JENSEN 1 6325 1 CEDAR AVE. S. TERRY J. SEVERSON 17P "w- a \\\\? PARCELS IMPACTED W. H. TRAISER & M. L. TRAISER I 8333 I CEDAR AVE. S. RONALD J. RYAN I 6529 I CEDAR AVE. S. - R. R. HENZ & G. J. HENZ 1 6341 I CEDAR AVE. S. LUANNE M. WENDLAND 1 6511 1 CEDAR AVE. S, PRIMROSE PROPERTIES LLC 1 6525 i CEDAR AVE. S. MM ????ppppl a. a I 6345 I CEDAR AVE. S. WILLIAM H. TRAISER EL AL I 6525 I CEDAR AVE. S. ! j 8'•ri41 HAROLD 0. TOUPIN 1 6122 1 CEDAR AVE. S. E. J. BRISSON & H. L. BRISSON 1 6529 j CEDAR AVE. S. 1 GERALD E. HOLMAN r I 8409 I CEDAR AVE. S. F. F. BOYLES JR. ET AL. TRUSTEES I 6533 I CEDAR AVE. S. y I i I I I 1 + ? ? GERALD E. HOLMAN I 8417 I CEDAR AVE. S. F. F. BOYIES JR. ET. AL TRUSTEES I 6537 1 CEDAR AVE. S. K. E. PETERS BILLIARD SUP, INC. 1 6421 1 CEDAR AVE. S. GERALD IVERSON RAYDAR MANAGEMENT INC, I 6425 1 CEDAR AVE. S. AMOCO OIL COMPANY 1 1820 1 66TH ST. E.,`- PI (( .. DONALD R. MORROW ET. AL. 1 1820 1 66TH ST. E. a I 8429 I CEDAR AVE. S. S. W. POPE & E. K. POPE I 1720 1 66TH A tl n» a n I. DONALD R. MORROW ET, AL. I 6437 I CEDAR AYE. 5 CHARLES BRINKER SL E. DONALD R. MORROW ET, AL. 1 6441 1 CEDAR AVE. S. JUDITH ANN ST CLAIR 1 1714 j 66TH ST. E. " . l { f 1 1708 1 66TH ST. E. DONALD R. MORROW ET AL. I 8445 I CEDAR AVE, S. ANDREW J. DYKSTRA I 1 700 1 66TH ST. E. ( - ry ' • p RICHARD H. FRYE 1 6500 1 CEDAR AVE. S. -- bd + i1 I l .. Ieal Ate. a I r+7 a a I I I t I ' R I _4_. .. t Ji 7: ., .. _ - 1124 Y CM AVE +i- d -A FL {2N' LT 98 7R715TA 1" . ? , .;,. „ e ;sw-m-mr 1 na t j w fl-r I ' entl St RAWA STA 70+00 'to a i 7«o A r r- s . -? i'hy 1 v I? ?IS 66RAMP i wLZ ER7 4 , ..H .aenTYr . '..._ I> m I I -......._..... ,. _. `? A?...._.yl? $AWSTRAWASTAM+70.y0 ._- ... ._.... _..: : ?, .._.._.._ ..... .. I I 900 _ .- .._ I 1' I' :..,:._ ., I...... I I ...f0+ I....-. _... ,.10010P_.....,,::,:. ,.-.. ':__. '?_ _..::... ..........,.,. _ _ .... _..? -.:.M II it 11o, d WWW . . ? gp w RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPACTED LEGEND PARCELS IMPACTED a t I ? I I I . C 10L • ?.._ a . _ - ..... .. ..» :;. _. i ter. - Im m„ dQI TAM e'M ?----?__-'?_--- WIL ?•?""LJ I A PL 2200' RT IB Tln 9p I4NK73 . J i? . \ LL { I a i ? I .. » ,,.. i x .`+.., {r m A rv fip J ....,. ..- w.... d _. s ? K v -- ---------- MM ST IIMPC STA 96/60.74 `- - A R 324W RT K TWn STA lam . 46 IN ST RA PC STA 1+6646 MWOT MAIINTENANCE FACILITY OWNER'S NAME IPROPERTYI STREET NAME OWNE[?SNAME IPROPERTYI ADDRESS - ADDRESS STREET N AME WILLIAM D. BLAINE 1 6301 1 CEDAR AVE. ?5_- (;.'W. RONALD ET. AL-TRUSTEES 1 6520 1 CEDAR AVE. S.' MARM,J.M7&N H.M. PAINTS INC, INC. ING 1 6311 1-CEDAR-AVE. S. G. W. RONALD EL AL-TRUSTEES 1 6528 1 CEDAR AVE, S.1 y_•. - 6325 1 CEDAR AVE. S. L.R. DEG.DIO JR. AL-TRUSTEES I 6501 I CEDAR AVE!. STEPHEN D. JENSEN - ` I 6325 I CEDAR AVE. S. TERRY J. SEVERSON I 6509 1 CEDAR AVE.'S. W. H. TRAISER°& M. L. TRAISER 1 63,33 1 CEDAR AVE. S. RONALD J. RYAN R: R. HENZ k G. J. HENZ 1 6341 1 CEDAR AVE. S. LUANNE M. WENDLAND I 66511 i CEDAR AVE. S 521 1 CEDAR AVE. S, PRIMROSE PROPERTIES LLC I 6345 I CEDAR AVE. S. 1WILLIAM H. TRAISER ET. AL I 6525 1 CEDAR AVE. S' HAROLD 0. TOUPIN I 6122 1 CEDAR AVE. GERALD S. E. J. BRISS?j dL L H L BRIS50N I. 6529 1 CEDAR AVE. 5. E, HOLMAN 1 6409 1 CEDAR AVE.?F' F. BOYLES J{. ET. AL-fRUSTEES 1 6533 1 CEDAR AVE. S,,, GERALD E, HOLMAN 1 6417 I__CSDAkr-AVE. S F7-F--1HOYLES"k ET. AL K. E. PETERS BIWARD SUP. INC ?J -642'j I EVE S GERALD IViRSON?ES S` RAYDAR MANAGEMENJJNC- I„6425- 1 CEDAR AVE. S AMOCO OIL COMPANY 118000 1 66 E, OONALQR.MORROW ETyA6i 1 6429 1 CEDAR AVE. S. S. W. POPE k E. K. POPE I 1720 166TH SL_E_? NALD -R-MORROW EL AL 1 6437 1 CEDAR AVE. S. CHARLES BRINKER I 1714--L$8TF{ST, E. LD R. MORROW ET. AL 1 6441 1 CEDAR AVE. S. JUDITH ANN ST CLAIR __-!--T708 166TH ST. E. DONALD R. MORROW ET. AL I 6445 1 CEDAR AVE. S. +ANDREW J. DYKS RICHARD H. FRYE 1 6r0 j''? I 1700 66TH ST. E. .,,..,.....-• rT? _ _ II ... .. 240 , .. . ..,,... n< se ? y" U CEDAR AVE. S. ?? I I + AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 3C REPORT # 22 r ,am STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: JOHN EVANS, ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: .JIM TOPITZHOFER, RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: 0 REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ET'_ ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of resolution authorizing the City of Richfield's application for the 2000 Municipal Recycling Grant from Hennepin County. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the attached resolution authorizing the City of Richfield to apply for and accept the annual Hennepin County Residential Recycling Grant. II. BACKGROUND The City of Richfield receives a municipal recycling grant from Hennepin County each year to promote recycling initiatives. 90% of this grant is given to Richfield residents as a quarterly utility bill refund and 10% is used to cover administrative costs of the recycling program. The amount of the grant varies from year-to-year; last year's grant was approximately $9,600. 1111. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY I • Richfield supports a residential recycling program as part of local environmental management. 0124 recycling me B. CRITICAL ISSUES I 30,-/ • Approval of the resolution is required to receive the grant. • Action is requested on January 24 to meet the grant application deadline. C. FINANCIAL • The City acts as a community partner and, with this grant, no expenses are incurred to administer this program. D. LEGAL M N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) Do not approve the resolution, preventing the implementation of the recycling program. • Deferring action is not an alternative as the grant deadline needs to be met. V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution authorizing the grant application. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING No public participation is anticipated. 0 M RESOLUTION NO. -3 c ca RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF MUNICIPAL GRANT APPLICATION FOR 2000 HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM WHEREAS, Hennepin County provides annual grants related to residential recycling programs; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to participate in the residential recycling grant program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Richfield City Council of the City of Richfield: 1. That a municipal grant application be processed for participation in the 1999 Hennepin County Residential Recycling Program. 2.That the City Manager of the City of Richfield is hereby authorized and directed to execute and file such application with Hennepin County Department of Environmental Management. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of January, • 2000. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor 4 AGENDA SECTION: Consent AGENDA ITEM # 3B REPORT # 21 9 J STAFF REPORT COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JANUARY 249 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: PAT PROK, SECRETARY NAAE, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: MICHAEL EASTLING, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: YIGAWTURE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: O ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration to approve pending condemnation for the property at 6701 Nicollet Avenue for the installation of the traffic signal at 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: Authorize condemnation of a 50 square foot corner of 6701 Nicollet Avenue and give authorization to City staff to procure an appraisal on the said property and have the City attorney settle the condemnation matter at the appraised amount. III. BACKGROUND On Tuesday, September 29, 1998 the City held a public meeting to gather input from the residents for redesigning Nicollet Avenue between 77th Street and 66th Street and installing a traffic signal at 67th Street. Officials were considering reducing Nicollet Avenue from four lanes to three with the center lane for left turns. The lane reduction design was opposed by the majority of the people who attended, but the proposal to move the signal, currently in the middle of the 6700 block of Nicollet, with a new one at the corner of 67th and Nicollet was supported by the residents. Because Nicollet is a County road, the City has to get permission from Hennepin County before the signal can be installed. The City also has to acquire easements from four property owners. Three of the four owners have responded favorably to the easement. City staff has met with the fourth owner, Richard Jellison, 6701 Nicollet Avenue, to explain the project and 0124-6701 Nicollet the need for the easement. Recent attempts to contact Mr. Jellison have been made by staff with no response. Therefore, in order to obtain title to the easement in a timely manner, the City is requesting Council authorize the acquisition of the property through condemnation. Staff remains hopeful that the 1 City can reach agreement with the owner prior to condemnation proceedings. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Minnesota Statutes Section 117.51 and 117.52 require acquiring authorities to meet the Federal "Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970," as amended, together with regulations implementing that Act. This is required on all city and county acquisitions, regardless of funding sources. B. CRITICAL ISSUES • Delay in the property purchase could result in a delay in the start of construction. C. FINANCIAL I • The regulations provide that the acquiring agency will pay certain expenses incidental to the transfer of property such as recording fees, transfer taxes and a pro rata share of prepaid property taxes. • This project is funded by Minnesota State Aid (MSA), and the City will be 00 reimbursed for the purchases. D. LEGAL • City attorney will be available for discussion at the meeting. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) ¦ City Council could refuse to give approval to the condemnation and thereby dismiss the whole project. ¦ Direct staff to continue to negotiate with the property owner. V. ATTACHMENTS • Sketch indicating easement location. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING N/A 33897024 WAL HOLY-EXU Z EASEMENT EXHIBIT 313' o ? FOR THE CITY OF ?a uwi 35.00 --- -- z ?- 75.00 RICHFIELD CHURCH OF .? -_T o °T- ' "ACADEMY OF THE "ST. PETERS" HOLY ANGLES" i z 1 ' ?) wo 0 ?? , - NI ; TEMP ; - w 0 r NORTH CONST.f J 0, TEMP. g O ?' CONST.--- 1 INCH = 40 FEET ' EASEMENT ?C- l o = EASEMENT C3 0 % f J 1 `I? 1 1 1 e-40.00 -j, _ 60.00 PERMANENT ROAD EASEMENT- - 12.0 --- 70.00 190.00 PERMANENT; , . ' ROAD --= 7- •I_ V to EASEMENT 7.0 7. 3 ? -- EAST LINE OF SW1/4 OF SECTION 27 of to M r''* ` CO. ROAD NO. 52 WEST LINE 1 OF SE/4 OF SECTION 27 TRAFFIC CONTROL 3 M TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL EASEMENT (N I COLLET AVE.) i SIGNAL EASEMENT 10.00- %- ?? ,,.10"I w .00 +M ---10.00 "JELLISON" r? . r Y % 700 THIRD S REET SOUTH YINNEAPOUS. MN 55415 BRW 6'2 370-700 f 612;370-13 8 (FAX; OEM= m, A DAMES & MOORE GROUP COMPANY I LiJ W ,a O ?a = 3 z I r o I (o t, N (R/W o x-30 -{ w z J 0 z 10.00•, "EGELAND" N S1/2 N1/2 - ? F 1_ V) ` O ` , C 1 ? • v `f % `% R/W }-30 - r , ro -' .i r'.I 0 1) 1 s-tr i bcLrQC1- &Uri" RESOLUTION NO. • THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS AND ACQUISITION OF EASEMENT OVER CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City") is a municipal corporation and subdivision of the State of Minnesota organized and operating under Minnesota law, as amended, and is authorized by Minn. Stat. § 465.01 to acquire real estate by exercising the power of eminent domain under and pursuant to Minn. Stat., Ch. 117; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is necessary and convenient to install a traffic signal at the corner of 67th Street and Nicollet Avenue in the City;; and WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City to acquire certain easements from private property owners in order to install, operate and maintain the traffic signal; and WHEREAS, the City staff have attempted unsuccessfully to acquire an easement for the traffic signal project over the property described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Subject Property"); and • WHEREAS, in order to install, operate, maintain and reconstruct the traffic signal, acquisition of an easement over the Subject Property is necessary and convenient for the promotion of the public health, safety and welfare of the City and its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, as follows: The City Council hereby finds acquisition of an easement over that part of the Subject Property and for the purposes as described in the attached Exhibit A to be suitable, necessary, convenient and reasonable and for a public purpose. 2. Pursuant to and in accordance with said Minn. Stat. Ch. 117, the City Council further finds that it is in the public interest to authorize and to direct the acquisition of the easement over the Subject Property for the installation, operation and maintenance of a traffic control signal. 3. The City Council hereby finds that it is desirable, reasonable, necessary and convenient, and for a public purpose, for the City to acquire the described easement over the Subject Property by eminent domain proceedings in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Stat. Ch. 117, including the early transfer of title and possession of the Subject Property • under Minn. Stat. § 117.042. CAH-175143vl RC 160-4 4. The City Attorney is authorized and. directed to acquire the Subject Property by use of eminent domain proceedings pursuant to this Resolution. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 2000. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 • CAH-175143v 1 RC 160-4 EXHIBITA TO RESOLUTION NO. Pror)ertvAddress: 6701 NicolletAvenue South, Richfield, Minnesota P.I.D. No.: 27-028-24-42-0019 Leaal Description of Subiect Proaertv: That part of the West Eighth of the North Half of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 27, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota; lying North of the South 250.00 feet thereof; subject to road right-of-way over the west 33 feet and the north 30 feet thereof. Easement Description: A perpetual, non-exclusive easement for traffic control signal purposes and appurtenant conduits and wires over, under and across and through that part of the above described property lying northwesterly of a line beginning at a point on the east right-of-way line of Nicollet Avenue, being 33.00 feet East of the west line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27, distant 40.00 feet South of the north line of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27 (also being the centerline of 67th Street East); thence Northeasterly to a point on the south right-of-way line of 67th Street East, distant 43.00 feet East of the west line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 27, and there terminating. is A-1 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 3A REPORT # 20 • • • STAFF REPORT 4> COUNCIL MEETING DATE: ` JANUARY 24, 2000 REPORT PREPARED BY: KATHY FARRIS, HUMAN SERVICES PLAN NER/COORDINTOR NAME, TITLE REPORT PRESENTER: KATHY FARRIS, HUMAN SERVICES PLANNER/COORDINATOR NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: SIGNAT 1 REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: kv URE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of approval of a joint powers agreement for Hennepin South Services Collaborative (HSSC); appointment of City Manager to serve on the HSSC Board of Directors; appointment of Human Services Planner/Coordinator as alternate on HSSC Board of Directors; appointment of Camillo DeSantis, Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council Chair, to the Research, Planning and Coordination (RPC) Commission of the HSSC; appointment of Susan Rosenberg as alternate to the Research, Planning and Coordination (RPC) Commission of the HSSC. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By motion: • Approve the resolution giving formal approval to the Joint Powers Agreement. • Appoint the City Manager to the HSSC Board of Directors. • Appoint the Human Services Planner/Coordinator as alternate to the Board of Directors. • Appoint Camillo DeSantis to the RPC Commission. • Appoint Susan Rosenberg as alternate to the RPC Commission. 0124hssc.doc III. BACKGROUND The City of Richfield has had a joint and cooperative agreement with the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Edina for the past 28 years to provide human service planning in south Hennepin and for the past five years to provide family services collaborative activities. In 1991, this agency was reorganized to establish the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency (SHeRPA). FamiLink, the South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative per Minnesota Statutes Section 124D.23, began in 1994 to more effectively meet the needs of families and children in South Hennepin. FamiLink formally incorporated in 1998 and contracted with SHeRPA for the provision of administrative and fiscal services to FamiLink. In August 1999 the SHeRPA Board of Directors, consisting of the four City Managers, and the FamiLink Board, consisting of the four City Managers, the four School Superintendents, a representative of Hennepin County, and a representative of Community Action for Suburban Hennepin, voted to merge the two organizations into one entity called Hennepin South Services Collaborative (HSSC). The principle elements included in the restructuring include: • The separate entities SHeRPA and FamiLink are abolished. In their place is one entity, Henenpin South Services Collaborative. The SHeRPA Board of Directors and the FamiLink Board of Directors will be abolished. In their place, the new agency has one Board of Directors consisting of the four City Managers and the four School Superintendents. Each member of the agency will also designate an alternate and a non- voting liaison to the Board. General powers of the Board include employing staff, entering into contracts, applying for and receiving financial support, investing funds, approving . annual work plans and budgets, ensuring fiscal accountability, establishing policies, resolving conflicts between Commissions and delegating responsibilities to the Commissions. • The new organization will have two divisions: Research, Planning and Coordination (RPC) and the Family Services Collaborative (FamiLink). Because the two functions are independent in operation, they have two separate Commissions overseeing their activities. • Each member of the agency will appoint a representative and an alternate to the Research, Planning and Coordination Commission. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The current structure is complicated, confusing and duplicative, especially for the four cities, which participate in both entities. Additionally, some of the cities find it difficult to explain and seek support for their participation in two separate entities. • SHeRPA and FamiLink need to consider formal agreements and contracts between each other. This is additional administrative work and, given the current structure, sometimes the nature of these agreements is unclear and raises legal and liability questions. • Contrary to a primary goal of the current structure, which was to maintain a streamlined • administration for both SHeRPA and FamiLink, some administrative costs are duplicated (e.g., audits). • The Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council has recommended that Camillo DeSantis be appointed to the RPC Commission. 3p_ aL B. CRITICAL ISSUES • The joint powers agreement must be approved by the February 9, 2000 Hennepin South Services Collaborative Board meeting. C. FINANCIAL I The City of Richfield currently contributes funds ($20,300 for 2000) and in-kind services to SHeRPA and in-kind services to FamiLink. Funding for HSSC includes 1) RPC: contributions from each of the four cities; grants on a project-by-project basis; 2) FamiLink: state funds; Local Collaborative Time Study (LCTS) funds, grants. D. LEGAL I The City of Richfield Attorney has prepared the joint and cooperative agreement and is present to answer questions. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) I • The Council may decide not to approve the joint powers agreement and cease providing regional human services planning and family services collaborative activities. • The Council could decide to develop their own human services planning capacity and cease participating in family services collaborative activities. • The City could attempt to join another regional planning effort and/or family services collaborative. • I V. ATTACHMENTS • Resolution • HSSC Joint Powers Agreement VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Camillo DeSantis, Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council Chair 0 RESOLUTION NO. -?A .3 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLABORATIVE JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR RESEARCH, PLANNING AND COORDINATION OF HUMAN SERVICES AND A FAMILY SERVICES COLLABORATIVE WHEREAS, the current structure of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and Famil-ink is complicated, confusing and duplicative, especially for the four cities, which participate in both entities and that reorganizing the two organizations into one entity will streamline administration and avoid duplicative overhead costs; and WHEREAS, the municpalities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina and Richfield along with the School Districts of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina and Richfield are desirous of creating and managing an agency to conduct regional research, planning and coordination and a family services collaborative in South Hennepin County; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Richfield approve the Hennepin South Services Collaborative Joint and Cooperative Agreement for Research, Planning and Coordination of Human Services and a Family Services Collaborative. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor be authorized to execute said agreement for the City of Richfield. 2000. • Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 24th day of January, Martin J. Kirsch Mayor Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk • e 3A-? HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENT ARTICLE I. PARTIES The parties to this Agreement are governmental units of the State of Minnesota. This Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, subdivisions 1 through 11 (1998). ARTICLE II. GENERAL PURPOSE Section 2.1. The parties have formed this Agreement for the purpose of providing an organization to accomplish the following: (a) To provide human services research, planning and coordination, both public and private, throughout the territory of the governmental parties to this Agreement, and . (b) To contract with other governmental units and private entities as necessary to establish and operate a family services collaborative, as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 124D.23 (1998), for the purposes of monitoring and addressing human service needs and providing coordinated family services. (c)To provide for additional joint and cooperative exercises of powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 471.59, as unanimously agreed by the parties' governing bodies. Section 2.2. The organization formed by this Agreement shall not be used or operated for the pecuniary gain, directly or indirectly, of any parry or any member of its board. The organization shall not participate or intervene in a political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office. • CAH-1594360 , 1-11-2000 1 RC 145-327 0 ARTICLE III. NAME The name of the organization created by this Agreement is Hennepin South Services Collaborative. The name may be changed in accordance with Section 14.1 of this Agreement. ARTICLE IV. DEFINITIONS Section 4.1. For the purpose of this Agreement, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. Section 4.2. "Hennepin South Service Collaborative" or "Agency" means the organization created pursuant to this Agreement. Section 4.3. "Appointing Authority" as used in sections 10.1 and 11.3 of this Agreement means the Governing Body of the Member or the director to whom the Governing Body has delegated the authority to appoint commission members. 0 Section 4.4. "Board" means the board of directors of the Agency, as established under Section 6.1 of this Agreement. Section 4.5. "Director" means a member of the Board of Directors of the Agency, except that "executive director" means a staff person employed by the Agency who shall not be a member of the Board of Directors. Section 4.6. "FSC Commission" means the Family Services Collaborative Commission as established under Section 11.1 of this Agreement. Section 4.7. "FSC Participant" means a Governmental Unit or Private Entity that is not a Member of the Agency but that contracts with the Agency for purposes of creating a family services collaborative under Minn. Stat. § 124D.23. Section 4.8. "Governing Body" means the policy-making and decision-making body of a Governmental Unit that has the authority to enter into contracts of this type. For example, with CAH-1594360 , 1-11-2000 2 RC 145-327 3A r (o 1 respect to a city, it means the city council; with respect to a county, it means the county board; and, with respect to a school district, it means the school board. Section 4.9. "Governmental Unit" means any political subdivision of the State of Minnesota including, but not limited to, a home rule or statutory city or school district. Section 4.10. "Human services" includes but is not limited to services and facilities to deal with and serve human needs. Section 4.11. "Member" means any Governmental Unit that is a member of the Agency as provided in Article V of this Agreement. Section 4.12. "Private Entity" means any private corporation, agency, association or foundation that provides human services to individuals and families, including, but not limited to, a private nonprofit community action agency under Minnesota Statutes, Section I I9A.375. Section 4.13. "RPC Commission" means the Research, Planning and Coordination Commission as established under Section 10.1 of this Agreement. . ARTICLE V. MEMBERSHIP Section 5.1. Any Governmental Unit located in the metropolitan area is eligible to be a Member of the Agency. Section 5.2. The initial Members of the Agency are: City of Bloomington, a home rule charter city and public health entity; City of Eden Prairie, a statutory city; City of Edina, a statutory city; City of Richfield, a home rule charter city; Independent School District No. 271, a school district; Independent School District No. 272, a school district; Independent School District No. 273, a school district; and independent School District No. 280, a school district. Section 5.3. A Governmental Unit may enter into this Agreement by resolution of its Governing Body and by execution of a copy of this Agreement by its proper officers. The CAH-1594360, 1-11-2000 3 RC 145-327 Governmental Unit must file an executed copy of the Agreement with the executive director of the Agency. The resolution authorizing the execution of the agreement must also designate the first director for the Board. Section 5.4. A Governmental Unit wishing to become a Member after the effective date of this agreement may be admitted only upon the favorable vote of two-thirds of the votes of the Board present and voting at any regular or special meeting. The Board may, in its by-laws, impose conditions upon the admission of additional Members. Section 5.5. A change in the governmental boundaries, structure, classification or organization of a Governmental Unit does not affect the eligibility of that Governmental Unit to become or remain part of the Agency ARTICLE VI. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 6.1. The governing body of the Agency is its Board of Directors. Each Member is entitled to select one director to serve on the Board and one alternate to carry out the duties of the director in his/her absence. Each director is entitled to one vote. In the absence of a director, the designated alternate for that director may vote. Section 6.2. A director is appointed by resolution of the Governing Body of the Member. A director serves until a successor is appointed. Except as provided in Section 9.4 of this Agreement, directors serve without compensation from the Agency, but nothing in this section is to be construed to prevent a Member from compensating its director for service on the Board if such compensation is otherwise authorized by law. Section 6.3. Vacancies in the office of director will exist for any of the reasons set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 351.02, clauses (1)-(3) and (5)-(8), or upon a revocation of a director's • CAH-159436v8 . 1-11-2000 4 RC 145-327 3AT? appointment by the appointing Member duly filed with the Agency. Vacancies are filled by resolution of the Governing Body of the Member whose position on the Board is vacant. Section 6.4. A quorum consists of that number of Board members that is equal to a majority of the members of the Board. Attendance by a quorum of the Board shall be necessary for conducting a meeting of the Board. The Board may take action at a meeting upon an affirmative vote of the majority of those Board members present. For purposes of counting votes and establishing a quorum under this section, the term "Board members" includes designated alternates only when the Board member for which the alternate was appointed is absent from the meeting in question. ARTICLE VII. EFFECTIVE DATE; ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS Section 7.1. This Agreement is effective on the date when the last of the executed 10 agreements and authorizing resolutions of all of the initial Members listed in Section 5.2 of this Agreement has been filed as provided in Section 5.3 of this Agreement. Section 7.2. Within 30 days after the effective date of this agreement, the director appointed in the authorizing resolution of the City of Richfield must call the first meeting of the Board, which meeting must be held no later than 60 days after the effective date of this agreement. Section 7.3. The first meeting of the Board will be the organizational meeting of the Agency. At the organizational meeting, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the Board must elect from among the directors a chair, a vice-chair, and a secretary-treasurer. A director may hold more than one office. Section 7.4. At the organizational meeting, or as soon thereafter as it may reasonably be done, the Board must adopt by-laws governing its procedures, including the time, place, notice for and frequency of its regular meetings, procedure for calling special meetings, and such other matters CAH- I 59436v8. 1-11-2000 5 RC 145-327 as are required by this Agreement. The Board may amend the by-laws from time to time. The Board must meet at least once each year and on such other dates as may be provided in its by-laws. The annual meeting is held in the month of May unless otherwise provided in the by-laws. Section 7.5. The Board may create an executive committee and other committees, as it may deem necessary pursuant to its by-laws. The executive committee may be authorized to exercise specified powers of the board of directors between Board meetings, subject to the limitations imposed upon it by the Board. Section 7.6. The Board shall create a Research, Planning and Coordination Commission ("RPC Commission") and a Family Services Collaborative Commission ("FSC Commission") in accordance with Articles X and XI of this Agreement. Section 7.7. The Board may create advisory councils, as it deems necessary pursuant to its 10 by-laws. ARTICLE VIII. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Section 8.1. The powers and duties of the Board of Directors include the powers set forth in this Article. Section 8.2. The Board may employ a person to act as executive director of the Agency. Section 8.3. The Board may make such contracts as are necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. Section 8.4. The Board may employ such other persons as it deems necessary to accomplish its powers and responsibilities. Persons may be employed on a full-time, part-time or consulting basis, as the Board determines. • CAH-1594360 , 1-11-2000 6 RC145-327 Section 8.5. The Board may apply for and receive financial support in the form of grants from any organization or agency in order to accomplish its purposes and may enter into the agreements necessary to obtain the support. Section 8.6. The Board may invest and reinvest funds not needed for current operating expenses, if any, in the manner applicable by law to statutory cities. The Agency may not incur obligations in excess of funds available to it. Section 8.7. The Board may contract for space, materials and supplies. Section 8.8. The Board shall make a financial accounting and report to the parties at least once each year. The Agency's books and records shall be available and open to examination to authorized representatives of the parties at all reasonable times. Provided, however, that data classified as "not public" and related to either the research, planning and coordination function of the Agency or to the family services collaborative function of the Agency shall be available only to those Members or FSC Participants who are involved in the function to which the data relates. Section 8.9. The Board shall secure insurance to protect the Agency, the Board, the officers and employees of the Agency and the parties in such form and amount as are agreed by the Board. Section 8.10. The Board shall establish policies and procedures with respect to the creation, collection, maintenance, and dissemination of government data, as may be required by applicable federal and state law. Section 8.11. The Board shall resolve conflicts or inconsistencies that may arise between the operations of the RPC Commission and FSC Commission. Section 8.12. The Board may exercise any other power necessary and convenient to the implementation of its powers and duties under the provisions of this Agreement. CAH- I 59436v8, 1-11-2000 7 RC 145-327 Section 8.13. The Agency shall not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, creed, national origin, color, religion, age, or disability, and will conform to all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations including, without limitation, the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et M. ARTICLE IX. OFFICERS Section 9.1. The officers of the Board are a chair, a vice-chair, and a secretary-treasurer elected by the Board for a term of one year and until their respective successors are elected at the annual meeting. New officers take office at the adjournment of the annual meeting at which they were elected. An officer must be a duly appointed director. No officer shall hold an office for a period that exceeds two consecutive terms. Section 9.2. A vacancy in the office of chair, vice-chair, or secretary-treasurer occurs for any of the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director occurs under Section 6.3 of this Agreement. Vacancies in these offices are filled by the Board for the unexpired portion of the term. Section 9.3. The chair presides at meetings of the Board. The vice-chair acts as chair in the absence or disability of the chair. Section 9.4. The secretary-treasurer is responsible for keeping a record of the proceedings of the Board, for custody of funds, for keeping of financial records of the Agency and for such other duties as may be assigned to the secretary-treasurer by the Board. Persons may be employed to perform such services under the supervision and direction of the secretary-treasurer as may be authorized by the Board. The secretary-treasurer must post a fidelity bond or other insurance against loss of Agency funds in the amount specified by the Board, the cost of such bond or insurance to be paid by the Board. The Board may provide for compensation of the secretary-- • treasurer for services to the Board. CA 11- 1 59436v8, 1-11-2000 8 RC 145-327 31 a 0 Section 9.5. In its by-laws, the Board may establish such other offices, as it deems necessary, in addition to those set forth in this Article IX. ARTICLE X. RESEARCH, PLANNING AND COORDINATION COMMISSION Section 10.1. The Research, Planning and Coordination Commission ("RPC Commission") establishes policies and objectives for the Agency's research, planning, and coordination activities. At the organizational meeting required under Section 7.3 of this Agreement and, thereafter, at or prior to the Board's annual meeting of each year, each Member must elect whether it will participate in the Agency's research, planning and coordination activities for the succeeding budget year. Section 10.2. The RPC Commission is composed of commissioners appointed in the manner and in the number as specified in the by-laws of the Agency. The by-laws must, at a minimum, provide: (a) that the appointing authority for every Member who elects to participate in 1 the RPC Commission activities may appoint at least one commissioner; and (b) that each Member participating in the Commission has one vote, regardless of the number of commissioners that the Member may have on the Commission. RPC commissioners are appointed for the budget year in which the Member has elected to participate in the Commission. The by-laws may also provide for non-voting representatives or liaisons to the Commission and may permit the appointment of Member's employees to serve as commissioners. Section 10.3. A vacancy in the office of an RPC commissioner occurs for any of the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director occurs under Section 6.3 of this Agreement. Vacancies are filled in the same manner as initial appointments of the RPC commissioners. Section 10.4. The RPC Commission shall have those powers and duties delegated to it by the Board, as further specified in the by-laws of the Agency, all of which must be related to the • CAH-1 59436v8, 1-11-2000 9 RC 145-327 • ?P-/3 research, planning and coordination function of the Agency. In addition, it may establish and register a trade name for the RPC Commission. Section 10.5. By majority vote of those commissioners present and voting, the RPC Commissioners shall select a commission chair to serve as the presiding 'officer of the RPC Commission and a vice-chair to serve in the absence of the chair. ARTICLE XI. FAMILY SERVICES COLLABORATIVE COMMISSION Section 11.1. The Family Services Collaborative Commission ("FSC Commission") establishes policies and objectives for the Agency's family services collaborative activities. Section 11.2. At the organizational meeting required under section 7.3 of this Agreement • and, thereafter, at or prior to the Board's annual meeting of each year, each Member must elect whether it will participate in the Agency's family services collaborative activities for the succeeding budget year. If the FSC Participants and Members that have agreed to participate in the FSC Commission for that budget year do not satisfy the minimum requirements under Minnesota Statutes Section 124D.23, the FSC Commission shall be inoperative for that budget year, and the Agency shall not conduct any family services collaborative activities in that year. Section 11.3. The FSC Commission is composed of commissioners appointed in the • manner and in the number as specified in the by-laws of the Agency. The by-laws must, at a minimum, provide: (a) that the appointing authority for every Member who elects to participate in the FSC Commission activities may appoint at least one commissioner; (b) that the appointing authority for every Governmental-Unit FSC Participant may appoint at least one commissioner; (c) that the appointing authorities for the participating Members and Governmental-Unit FSC Participants must appoint any other commissioners; and (d) that every Private-Entity FSC Participant is entitled to at least .one commissioner, to be appointed as provided at clause 11.3(c). CAH-159436v8, 1-11-2000 10 RC 145-327 FSC commissioners are appointed for the budget year in which the Commission will operate. Each FSC commissioner is entitled to one vote. The by-laws may also provide for non-voting representatives or liaisons to the Commission. Section 11.4. A vacancy in the office of FSC commissioner occurs for any of the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director occurs under Section 6.3 of this Agreement. Vacancies are filled in the same manner as initial appointments of FSC commissioners. Section 11.5. The FSC Commission shall have the following powers and duties: a. It may establish and register a trade name for the family services collaborative to be operated by the FSC Commission. b. It may exercise any of the powers of a family services collaborative, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 124D.23; provided, however, that it may not assume the duties of another agency as provided by Minnesota Statutes, section 124D.23, subdivision 3, without prior approval of the Board. c. It shall perform all of the duties required of a family services collaborative, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, section 124D.23. d. It shall have those powers and duties delegated to it by the Board, as further specified in the by-laws of the Agency, which must be related to the family services collaborative function of the Agency. Section 11.6. By majority vote of those commissioners present and voting, the FSC Commissioners shall select a commission chair to serve as the presiding officer of the FSC Commission and a vice-chair to serve in the absence of the chair. ARTICLE XII. FINANCIAL MATTERS Section 12.1. The fiscal year of the Agency is the calendar year. CAH-1594360, 1-11-2000 11 RC 145-327 3a; 15 Section 12.2. The Board shall establish separate accounting funds for the research, planning and coordination function of the Agency (the "RPC Fund") and the family services collaborative function of the Agency (the "FSC Fund"). Section 12.3. The RPC Fund shall consist of funds available from grants, gifts, private revenues, voluntary contributions of Members, or required contributions from Members, if it is determined by the Board by a two-thirds vote, by written action or at a regular or special meeting, of all votes of then existing Members, that such contributions are necessary. Section 12.4. The FSC Fund shall be an integrated fund, which may consist of federal, state, local or private resources, including contributions from Members and FSC Participants as required under Section 12.5 of this Agreement. Section 12.5. Each FSC Participant and each Member who elects to take part in the family services collaborative function of the Agency in any budget year must make a minimum cash or in- kind contribution of $500.00 to the FSC Fund for that budget year. Section 12.6. The Board shall determine in its annual budget the portion of general overhead and operating expenses that are attributable to each fund. Section 12.7. Agency funds shall be expended in accordance with the procedures established by law for the expenditure of funds by statutory cities. Orders, checks and drafts shall be signed, and other legal instruments shall be executed on behalf of the Agency as provided in the by-laws. Section 12.8. Contracts shall be let and purchases made in conformance with the legal requirements applicable to contracts and purchases of optional Plan B cities and for such purposes the executive director, if any, shall be deemed to occupy a position equivalent to that of a city • CA14-159436v8 , 1-11-2000 12 RC 145-327 9 manager. Any contract in excess of $10,000.00 must be approved by a two thirds majority of the Board. Section 12.9. The Board (1) is strictly accountable for all funds received and for funds expended by it, (2) shall have an annual audit of its books, and (3) shall make an annual report of all of its receipts and disbursements to each of the parties to this Agreement and to each FSC Participant. Section 12.10. The RPC Commission and FSC Commission shall each recommend a proposed annual budget for their respective operations and submit their recommended budget to the Board by May 1 of each year. The Board shall formulate a proposed annual budget for the Agency and submit it to all Members and FSC Participants on or before June 1 for their approval. The budget shall be deemed approved by a Member or FSC Participant unless, prior to August 1 of the year involved, the Member or FSC Participant gives notice in writing to the Agency that it does not approve the budget. The budget shall be revised and resubmitted to the Members and FSC Participants until it is approved; provided, that approval by FSC Participants is only required for those portions of the budget that relate to the activities of the FSC Commission. Final action adopting an annual budget shall be taken by the Board on or before September 1. The Members shall be obligated to pay the amount specified as their contribution in the budget unless that Member has withdrawn pursuant to Article XIII. FSC Participants shall be obligated to pay contributions as specified in their contracts with the Agency. Section 12.11. Except as authorized by law, no member of the Board or other public officer of the organization who is authorized to take part in any manner in the making of any sale, lease or contract may voluntarily have a personal financial interest in such transaction or personally benefit financially therefrom. CAH-159436v8, 1-11-2000 13 RC 145-327 Section 12.12. The liability of the Agency, its officers and employees shall be subject to the immunities and limitations provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. ARTICLE XIII. DURATION AND DISSOLUTION Section 13.1. The Agency will exist, and this agreement is in effect, for an indefinite term until dissolved in accordance with Section 13.3 of this article. Section 13.2. A Member may withdraw from the Agency effective as of December 31 of any year by filing a written notice with the secretary-treasurer on or before August 1 of such year. However, any Member which is a public school district shall comply with Minn. Stat. § 123B.02, subd. 3 and notify the agency Members of its intent to withdraw on or before February 1 of any years, and the withdrawal shall be effective June 30 of.the same year. A withdrawing Member shall be obligated to pay the Agency its budgeted contribution for the year in which the notice of withdrawal is given. The withdrawing Member shall continue to be a parry to this Agreement until the effective date of such notice of withdrawal. A notice of withdrawal may be rescinded by a Member at any time prior to the withdrawal becoming effective. If a Member withdraws before dissolution of the Agency, the Member will have no claim on the assets of the Agency. . Section 13.3. The Agency must be dissolved whenever the withdrawal of a Member reduces total number of Members in the Agency to less than three. The Agency may be dissolved at any time by unanimous vote of all Members. Section 13.4. In the event of dissolution, the Board shall determine the measures necessary to effect the dissolution and provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances permit, subject to the provisions of this Agreement. Upon dissolution of the Agency all remaining assets of the Agency, after payment of obligations (including obligations to FSC Participants), shall be distributed among the then-existing Members in proportion to their respective contributions. If CAH-159436v8,1-11-2000 14 RC 145-327 _?p _/9 there have been no contributions by any party, surplus monies of the Agency - shall, upon termination of the Agency, be first allocated between funds related to RPC activities and FSC activities; allocated funds shall be returned to the parties in proportionate shares, which shall be determined by attributing one share for each year that the party elected to participate in the respective RPC or FSC activity. The Agency will continue to exist after dissolution for the period, no longer than six months, necessary to wind up its affairs but for no other purpose. ARTICLE XIV. TRANSITIONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS Section 14.1. The name of the organization created by this Agreement may be changed when deemed appropriate by the Board, but only upon a two-thirds majority vote of all the votes of the Board of Directors taken at a regular meeting of the Board or by written action. If the name of the organization is so changed, the Board shall provide in its by-laws for necessary measures to effect the change in official and unofficial documents, papers, and other essential respects. Section 14.2. It is the intention of the parties to this Agreement that the organization created hereby is the successor to the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and the South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative in existence on the day prior to the effective date of this Agreement. The South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency was formed by a Joint Powers Agreement among City of Bloomington, a home rule charter city and public health entity; City of Eden Prairie, a statutory city; City of Edina, _a statutory city; and City of Richfield, a home rule charter city on . The South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative was formed by a Joint Powers Agreement among South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency; County of Hennepin; Independent School District 271; Independent School District 272; Independent School District 273; Independent School District 280; Community Action for Suburban Hennepin on March 25, 1998. It is further the intention of the parties that any funds made available to the organization CAH-159436v8, 1-11-2000 15 RC145-327 created by this Agreement from the assets of the former South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and the former South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative must be used exclusively for the purposes of this Agreement. The adopted budgets of the former South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and the South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative remain in effect until revised and until the new annual budget is adopted. The adoption of this Agreement does not affect or modify the obligation of members of the former South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and the South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative to make contributions authorized by the former South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency and the former South Hennepin Family Services Collaborative. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Governmental Unit or Private Entity has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers and delivered on its behalf. • By Its By Its Dated: '199 Filed in the office of the of this day of '199-. • CAH- I 59436v8, 1-11-2000 16 RC 145-327