101315CompleteAgenda SPECIAL CONCURRENT CITY COUNCIL AND HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY WORKSESSION
RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, BARTHOLOMEW ROOM
OCTOBER 13, 2015
6:30 PM
Call to order
1. Discussion regarding Lakes at Lyndale wayfinding signage(Council Memo No.88/HRA Memo No.34)
Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at
least 96 hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
OCTOBER 13, 2015
7:00 PM
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
Call to order
Open forum(15 minutes ma)imum)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments
are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.Individuals who wish to address
the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of the minutes of the (1)Special Concurrent City Council, HRA and Planning Commission Worksession of
September 22,2015 and (2)Regular City Council Meeting of September 22,2015.
PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation by Richfield School District Superintendent Steve Unowsky.
2. Consideration of a resolution supporting the Richfield Public Schools 2015 levy referenda.
Staff Report No. 152
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
3. Hats Off to Hometown Hits
AGENDA APPROVAL
4. Approval of the agenda.
5. Consent Calendar contains several separate items,which are acted upon by the City Council in one
motion.Once the Consent Calendar has been approved,the individual items and recommended
actions have also been approved.No further Council action on these items 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 the approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Sections 405,406,407 and
408 of the Richfield City Code to remove/correct outdated terminology and references,as well as clarify
language and intent,and update State Code references and scheduling the second reading and public
hearing for October 27,2015.
Staff Report No. 153
B. Consideration of the approval of the resolution designating the City's contribution towards health,term life,
disability and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees for 2016.
Staff Report No. 154
C. Consideration of the approval of the purchase of truck chassis from Nuss Truck and Equipment for
$104,981 and dump box/snow plow equipment from Towmaster, Inc.for$109,215, minus$36,000 for trade
in,totaling $178,196 plus taxes and licensing in 2016 for use by the Public Works Department.
Staff Report No. 155
D. Consideration of the approval of the acceptance of the bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract for
Penn Avenue Street Lighting to LPD Electric, Inc. in the amount of$54,471.40 and authorize the Community
Development Director to approve additional contract work provided it does not exceed $25,000,or the
maximum of the remaining Community Development Block Grant funding,whichever is less.
Staff Report No. 156
E. Consideration of the approval of a resolution granting Site Plan Approval and Variances to allow
construction of a building addition at 7532 Lyndale Avenue.
Staff Report No. 157
6. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the special assessment roll for unpaid false alarm user fees
against private property.
Staff Report No. 158
8. Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the special assessment roll for weed elimination from private
property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property.
Staff Report No. 159
9. Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the assessment for removal of diseased trees from private
property for work ordered in 2014.
Staff Report No. 160
10. Public hearing regarding resolutions pertaining to the annual 77th Street Project Area assessment process.
Staff Report No. 161
11. Public hearing regarding resolutions pertaining to the annual Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet(LHN)maintenance
assessment process.
Staff Report No. 162
RESOLUTIONS
12. Consideration of a resolution awarding the sale of$5,695,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds,Series
20156.
Staff Report No. 163
OTHER BUSINESS
13. Consideration of the City Council's confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of an Housing and Redevelopment
Authority(HRA)Commissioner.
Staff Report No. 164
CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
14. City Manager's Report
CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
15. Claims and payrolls
Open forum(15 minutes maximum)
Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others. Comments
are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda.Individuals who wish to address
the Council must have registered prior to the meeting.
16. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request.Requests must be made at least 96
hours in advance to the City Clerk at 612-861-9738.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
October 8, 2015
Council Memorandum No. 88 HRA Memorandum No. 34
Housing and Redevelopment
The Honorable Mayor Authority Commissioners
and City of Richfield
Members of the City Council
Subject: Lakes at Lyndale Wayfinding Signage Discussion
(Worksesson Agenda Item No. 1)
Council Members and Commissioners:
The Lakes at Lyndale area centered around 66th Street & Lyndale Avenue is home to
significant redevelopment, Richfield Lake, Woodlake Nature Center, and is considered
to be the City's "downtown". In 2013 a Connectivity Plan was completed to provide
guidance for improvements throughout this area, to promote the mayor uses and
activities, and to encourage pedestrian travel. Following approval of the Plan, the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) contracted with Signia Design to develop
a wayfinding signage plan for the Lakes at Lyndale area.
Utilizing feedback from residents via Richfield Connect and from staff, Signia Design
developed several options (attached) for wayfinding signage to be located in the Lakes
at Lyndale area. Signia Design will be presenting these options at a joint worksession
of the City Council and HRA on October 13, 2015 at 6:30 p.m. in an effort to garner
additional feedback and narrow the selection.
Potential signage could include gateway markers, interpretive signs,
di tional/wayfinding signs & standard street signs.
c ully subm' d,
r
S n L. D vic
ii Manager
SLD:mrb
Attachment: Lakes at Lyndale Wayfinding Signage options
Lakes at Lyndale Connectivity Plan Map
Email:Assistant City Manager
Planning Commission
Department Directors
a a m - LU J -
m m In 0
c c LU o o m o o "o c Q U d W • •
m E
z
J In
J F
a1 N m N R R d V UJ V N LCL 1
W Y 3 c v o c E a c v c a c = c Q H
um m y o.� m m m °ai�� m m m m m a� .m a� H o O
Z IL-m � >-m M m w LU
Y
CL
o W J �' ♦ ♦ ♦ J OC V •
•
•
n.
m •
a4 Y 1
w •
O
Y •
•
1
c c
m o
iC
w �
m
— a O
y
o'
o
U rl� c
o_ m
a m
ca
Z
C U
m m
3
a
LU
T
a
II ii
0
m ft
I 3
ts
w
U` in
a
o
� � c
LLI
LLI
0 C
N0 ;L
U
CL
O
�U
II
C
II
C
II
l --
.i0
O
m
x
v
1 ■
u A L L
C ++ w O w 0
w
� N
H
m au mg o o � Jw o
m
_ o o r; Q d W • •
m e Q U E w v m `m ami v z
@ m _ � N
At
m3 3 e m i a c a c y" m m y ~ W V1 W
W to
m x @ o m "m
EN � @ a� m rn o m
Z W Jrn oam € C7ma c '@o
WCL fL > m h ® 0
W
a
ULLIU •
•
t6 N •
Z`m a.ro •
m m c m
U �U
O
m Ul`� •
,nmm,mm,mmmmmmm ni - >C5
1
l0 @ N •
c •
o m
U L
> o y •
U)Q
�—r
utJ n+ ritu'�u- dfi,lisp w. O m
41 U L
a @ @
m
117
U j)
t N C m
>❑ � C
O
rA
m U
ao
c
0
� U
U
N @
>a
C M �•
II ° mow
m m
@ E C
� Q N
CL
I�
C C N
m O N
-aam
I
m o@
I I I a o
m�m
LM
VA
CL
0
c
_ IIIIIIIIIIIIII I 'I
T - illllllllllllll
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
- - IIIIIIIIIIIIIII i' � a
C
aW -j V) •
m <O c c c m QLU • •
m c o m fl 2 0 a C W_
C SU U U ^
'N CL
i..l BJ. 1
A c o aw m m - a@ a c a 2 Z - _
� m vcm wws=
cc c.� c � c a } � Z V
W to OL /
d 0
Z m o n N E a c-�v d w w a N
W Y U w > L!J S-
W J® ~ •
= U •
IL
s
CD
•
•
4tl 1
W ® W y QLu jj_ •
Q 1- >- O_ W • •
Z LU Z U =
J uj U
QI V LL OD
O
W
U • •
•
f
1 ` •
1 6
711 k.
S 3ntl AdngMd
>z OL
AVMIIVU (D
r
S3ntl ONtlN9 .e i}�Rif�.�'n b
E
S 3nv i31HaVH i
n
N Sib � S
• _ •• �w kw
� J
O 2178� d
"NA7
W i
s 3ntl Nosa3w3
LT
U �
Q
w Z o a Q
O N J z P7- U a— o b
•�Q,U— o z z O wcUr` Z E c QQC
C U
=
O t7 QD_- DL Q w Z
Oz a ,rLC�
°
,j v a o
a
o n. E 0U az UF.Q -
QzWO
°
pQ = w A 'a
• < 0 ,.
II1 � W J l.L 4' •
Lor) � ��� W
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Special Concurrent City Council,
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
and
Planning Commission Worksession
September 22, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
The concurrent worksession was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 6:00 p.m. in the
Bartholomew Room.
Council Members Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Edwina Garcia; Pat Elliott; Michael Howard; and
Present: Tom Fitzhenry.
HRA Members Mary Supple, Chair; Pat Elliott; and Debbie Goettel.
Present:
HRA Member Doris Rubenstein and Dave Gepner.
Absent:
Planning Commission Rick Jabs, Chair; Sean Hayford Oleary; Erin Vrieze Daniels; Daniel
Members Present: Kitzberger; and Charles Standfuss.
Planning Commission Susan Rosenberg and Gordon Vizecky.
Member Absent:
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager/Executive Director; John Stark, Community
Development Director; Karen Barton, Assistant Community Development
Director; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Coordinator.
Item #1 DISCUSSION REGARDING CEDAR CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
(COUNCIL MEMO NO. 84/HRA MEMO NO. 32)
City Manager/Executive Director Devich stated Interstate Partners, one of the two developers
for the Cedar Corridor Redevelopment scheduled for this evening, requested their presentation be
postponed to October.
Ken Carlson, Anderson Companies, presented two preliminary proposals for a multi-family
rental housing development south of 66th Street between 17th Avenue and Cedar Avenue. Option A
included development along both sides of Richfield Parkway with a 30 mph roadway. Option B
included a majority of the development on the westside of the Parkway with a 25 mph roadway.
Mr. Carlson reviewed both concept site plans, including parking, stormwater ponding, design
standards to address airport noise, Three Rivers Park District bike path, outreach to neighborhood,
and construction timeline.
The City Council, HRA and Planning Commission consensus was to have Anderson
Companies proceed with Option A and return with more details.
Special Worksession Minutes -2- September 22, 2015
Community Development Director Stark, at Mayor Goettel's request, summarized the
Interstate Partners concept plans for development of six parcels located at the southwest corner of
the roundabout at 66th Street and Richfield Parkway with a preferred use as a medical office.
Mr. Stark stated the HRA has approved JLG Architects to update the Cedar Corridor Master
Plan to integrate different users.
The concurrent worksession was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:37 p.m.
Date Approved: October 13, 2015.
Debbie Goettel
Mayor
Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich
Executive Coordinator City Manager
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
Richfield, Minnesota
Regular Meeting
September 22, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Council Members Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Pat Elliott; Edwina Garcia; Tom Fitzhenry; and
Present: Michael Howard
Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Jay Henthorne, Public Safety Director;
Kristin Asher, Public Works Director; John Stark, Community Development
Director; Robert Hintgen, Utilities Superintendent; Mary Tietjen, City
Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Executive Coordinator.
OPEN FORUM
Peter Toensing, Richfield Citizens for a Quality Community, discussed the School District
referenda on the November ballot and requested the City Council approve a resolution of support
for the referenda at their next City Council meeting.
The City Council requested the resolution be placed on the October 13, 2015 agenda for
formal approval.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/Fitzhenry, S/Garcia to approve the minutes of the (1) Special City Council Worksession
of September 8, 2015; and (2) Regular City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #1 COUNCIL DISCUSSION
• Hats Off to Hometown Hits
The City Council acknowledged the success of the September 20 PennFest event.
Council Member Fitzhenry provided a Noise Oversight Committee update.
Council Meeting Minutes -2- September 22,2015
Mayor Goettel stated the City has received redevelopment proposals for the east side of
Richfield and the HRA approved the updating of the Master Plan along the Cedar Corridor to
integrate different developments.
Council Member Garcia acknowledged the efforts of Recreation Services Director Jim
Topitzhofer.
Item #2 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Goettel requested the agenda be amended to remove Item No. 5.
City Manager Devich explained the second reading of the tobacco ordinance (Item No. 5)
will be rescheduled to November 10 to enable the City to mail the specific 30-day written
notification to current licensees as directed by State Statute.
M/Elliott; S/Howard to approve the agenda, as amended.
Motion carried 5-0.
Item #3 CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Consideration of the approval of a right-of-entry agreement between Mesaba Capital
Development, LLC and the City Council and the Richfield HRA relating to the proposed
development of the former City public works site S.R. No. 144
B. Consideration of the approval of a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for the
Richfield Foundation's Wine and Cheese event to take place on Thursday, October 8, 2015
in the atrium area of Houlihan's Restaurant and Bar, located at 6601 Lyndale Avenue South
S.R. No. 145
C. Consideration of the approval of an annual event for a temporary on sale intoxicating liquor
license for the Church of St. Peter, located at 6730 Nicollet Avenue South, for their
Oktoberfest event to take place on Friday, October 2, 2015 and Saturday, October 3, 2015
S.R. No. 146
D. Consideration of the approval of the second amendment to the site lease agreement at
6355 Penn Avenue between the City of Richfield and Sprint Spectrum Realty Company, LP
(successor in interest to Sprint Spectrum LP) to modification in cellular telephone antenna
facilities S.R. No. 147
E. Consideration of the approval of setting a public hearing to be held on October 27, 2015 for
the consideration of the issuance of new on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor licenses
for Minnesota Junior Hockey Group, LLC, d/b/a Minnesota Magicians, located at the
Richfield Ice Arena, 636 east 66th Street S.R. No. 148
F. Consideration of the approval of a resolution certifying delinquent water, sanitary sewer and
storm water charges to the Hennepin County Auditor S.R. No. 149
RESOLUTION NO. 11118
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CERTIFICATION OF UNPAID WATER, SANTITARY SEWER,
AND STORM WATER CHARGES TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR TO BE COLLECTED
WITH OTHER TAXES ON SAID PROPERTIES
This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11118.
M/Goettel, S/Elliott to approve the Consent Calendar.
Motion carried 5-0.
Council Meeting Minutes -3- September 22,2015
Item #4 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT
CALENDAR
None.
Item #5 CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE THAT
AMENDS THE CITY'S TOBACCO ORDINANCE AND A RESOLUTION OF
SUMMARY PUBLICATION S.R. NO. 150
This item was removed from the City Council agenda.
Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF THE SECOND READING OF AN UPDATE TO
ORDINANCES 428 AND 429 RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION SITE RUNOFF
CONTROL AND POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUMMARY PUBLICATION S.R. NO. 151
Council Member Goettel presented Staff Report No. 151.
M/Fitzhenry, S/Howard that this constitutes the second reading of Bill No. 2015-11,
amending Sections 428 and 429 of the Richfield City Code which pertains to construction site
runoff control and post-construction stormwater management, that it be published in the official
newspaper, and that it be made part of these minutes, and that the following resolution be adopted
and that it be made part of these minutes:
RESOLUTION NO. 11119
RESOLUTION APPROVING SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
SECTION 428 AND 429 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE WHICH PERTAINS TO EROSION AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL REGULATIONS AND WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
REGULATIONS
Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 11119.
Item #7 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
None.
Item #8 CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
M/Fitzhenry, S/Elliott that the following claims and payrolls be approved:
U.S. Bank 09/22/15
A/P Checks: 243891-244332 2,876,818.17
Payroll: 113169-113504 $ 567,020.50
TOTAL $ 3,443,838.67
Motion carried 5-0.
Council Meeting Minutes -4- September 22,2015
OPEN FORUM
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council Meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 7:45 p.m.
Date Approved: October 13, 2015
Debbie Goettel
Mayor
Cheryl Krumholz Steven L. Devich
Executive Coordinator City Manager
AGENDA SEC-10N: PRESENTATONS
AGENDA ITEM# 2.
STAFF REPORT NO. 152
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Steven L. Devich,City Manager
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution supporting the Richfield Public Schools 2015 levy referenda.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the September 22, 2015 City Council Meeting a group of Richfield residents representing an independent
citizen committee called "Citizens for a Quality Community" (CQC) addressed the City Council and asked that
they support the upcoming school district referenda election to be held on November 3, 2015.
The City Council asked City staff to consult with the group to present a resolution for consideration at the
October 13 City Council Meeting. A resolution has been prepared and is before the City Council this
evening.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion: Approve the resolution supporting the Richfield Public Schools 2015 levy referenda.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Contained in the Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes.etch
The City Council has previously adopted resolutions of support for other school referendum questions.
The resolution is the formal process to offer such support.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
This item should be considered at the October 13 City Council Meeting so there is ample time to assure
that the community is aware of the City Council's position on this matter prior to the November 3 election.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no direct financial impact to the City regarding the adoption of this resolution. OF course, the
passage or defeat of the referendum would have a financial impact on the school district as well as
properties in the City.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
The City Council has the legal authority to adopt such a resolution if it chooses to do so.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
None
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Members of the Richfield Citizens for a Quality Community.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
D Resolution Resolution Letter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING RICHFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS
DISTRICT 280 LEVY REFERENDA
WHEREAS, the levy referendum in the amount of $933.66 per pupil that was
approved by voters in 2005 is expiring; and
WHEREAS, general education aid from the state has not kept pace with inflation
and the purchasing power of the operating levy approved 10 years ago has been
commensurately reduced; and
WHEREAS, a successful passage of the levy renewal and additional inflation-
adjusted annual levy increase will enable the district to maintain current educational
programming; and
WHEREAS, the inflation-adjusted increase will not exceed 2%; and
WHEREAS, the district relies upon voter-approved operating levies for providing
several core educational services including providing extra math and reading support,
offering courses at Richfield High School which qualify for college credit, hiring
additional licensed teachers, and keeping class sizes below Board-approved goals; and
WHEREAS, successful passage of both levy referendums will help support and
challenge Richfield students and increase student achievement consistent with
community expectations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is open to and supportive of all avenues of
cooperation and collaboration with the Richfield schools; and
WHEREAS, the City Council understands the necessity of a strong school
system in order to attract and keep families thereby assuring the future of our
community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Richfield City Council supports
both the renewal of the existing referendum levy and the inflation-adjusted increase for
Richfield School District 280 and encourages residents to vote "yes" on both ballot
questions on November 3, 2015.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of
October, 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SEC-10N: CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM# 5.A.
STAFF REPORT NO. 153
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Karen Barton, Community Development Assistant Director
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: None
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the approval of the first reading of an ordinance amending Sections 405, 406, 407 and
408 of the Richfield City Code to remove/correct outdated terminology and references, as well as
clarify language and intent, and update State Code references and scheduling the second reading and
public hearing for October 27, 2015.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Community Development staff continually monitors and notes areas of the Richfield City Code that may
require review and updating. This review may be the result of changes in State Codes/Laws or their
interpretation, new technology, outdated terminology, or direct experience with a particular regulation. The
attached ordinance primarily addresses minor technical issues and clarifies existing language
related to portions of the City Code relating to the regulation and administration of housing
inspections.
Summary of proposed changes:
• Replace references to "director of public safety" with "director of community development" or"director
of community development, or the director's designee."
• Include posting of notice of violation on the property for service of notice.
• Clarification of minimum standards for basic equipment and installation.
• Update of minimum standards for basic equipment and installation to reflect current State Codes.
• Clarification of Responsibilities of owners and residents.
• Require a local property manager for all rental properties.
• Clarification of occupancy relating to the certificate of housing maintenance compliance for single- and
two-family homes.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion:
1. Approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Subsection 405.04, Subdivision 2;
Subsection 405.05, Subdivision 8; Subsection 405.07, Subdivision 2 (a) and (b) and Subdivision 3
(a); Subsection 405.11, Subdivision 6; Subsection 405.13, Subdivision 5; Subdivision 405.15,
Subdivision 3; Subsection 405.17; Subsection 406.01, Subdivision 3; Subsection 407.09,
Subdivisions 2, 3, 4, and 5; Subsection 407.13, Subdivisions 1(b) and 1(d); Subsection 408.01,
Subdivision 2 (b) and Subdivision 6; and repealing Subsection 405.17 (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) and (g).
2. Approve scheduling the second reading and public hearing for October 27, 2015.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
This information is contained in the Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
• Ongoing review and periodic updating of the Code is necessary to ensure that regulations
are serving their intended purposes.
• Clear and correct language is important to both staff and our customers.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
None
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
• The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed amendments.
• If the first reading is approved, a second reading and public hearing of the proposed ordinance
will be held on October 27, 2015.
• Notice of the public hearing will be published in the Sun Current Newspaper in accordance with
State and Local requirements.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(3)-
• Deny a first reading of the proposed ordinance.
• Approve a first reading with amendments.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
D Housing Code Amendments Ordinance
BILL NO.
AMENDMENT TO RICHFIELD CITY CODE RELATED TO HOUSING
MAINTENANCE
AMENDING Subsection 405.04, Subdivisions 2; Subsection 405.05,
Subdivision 8; Subsection 405.07, Subdivision 2 (a) and (b) and
Subdivision 3 (a); Subsection 405.11, Subdivision 6; Subsection 405.13,
Subdivision 5; Subdivision 405.15, Subdivision 3; Subsection 405.17;
Subsection 406.01, Subdivision 3; Subsection 407.09, Subdivisions 2, 3, 4,
and 5; Subsection 407.13, Subdivisions 1(b) and 1(d); Subsection 408.01,
Subdivision 2 (b) and Subdivision 6; and repealing Subsection 405.17 (b)
(c) (d) (e) (f) and (g).
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1 Subsection 405.04, Subdivision 2 of the Richfield City Code is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2. Minnesota state statutes. Nothing in this section is
intended to modify or abrogate the rights of tenants or landlords
granted by Minnesota Statutes, chapter 4058. The director of
community development may designate, subject to the city council
approval, administrators to carry out the duties assigned by the
court pursuant to said statute.
Section 2 Subsection 405.05, Subdivision 8 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 8. "Enforcement officer" means the director of community
development or the director's designee.
Section 3 Subsection 405.07, Subdivision 2 (a) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2. Violations. (a) Notice. If a violation of this section has
occurred, or the enforcement officer has reasonable grounds to
believe that a violation has occurred, notice will be given to the
licensee, or if there is no license, to the owner, operator, or resident
of the premises. Notice of the violation must be in writing and sent
by United States mail to the last known address of such person, or
may be posted on the property where the violation exists. The
mailed notice will give the licensee, owner, or operator a specified
number of days, up to 30 days to correct the violation. The
enforcement officer has the authority to extend the time period to
correct a violation if, in the discretion of the enforcement officer,
good cause has been shown.
Section 4 Subsection 405.07, Subdivision 2 (b) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2. Violations. (b) Appeal. A licensee of a rental property or
an owner or resident of a non-rental property may appeal a
determination that a violation of this section exists. The licensee,
owner, or resident must submit a written request for an appeal to
the director of community development within ten days after
receiving a notice of violation under paragraph (a). A request for an
appeal must be based on a claim that the true intent of this section
or rule adopted hereunder have been incorrectly interpreted: that
the provisions of this section do not apply, that the requirement
under this section would cause undue hardship. A hearing will be
held within 20 days after the director of community development
receives the written request for an appeal. The director of
community development or the director's designee will act as the
hearing official and will consider all relevant evidence, documents,
and verbal presentations submitted during the hearing by both the
licensee, owner, or resident and the enforcement officer or other
city staff. The director of community development or the director's
designee will issue a written decision to the appealing party and the
b uildiRg effi6a' within ten days of the hearing.
Section 5 Subsection 405.07, Subdivision 3 (a) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 3. Prosecution and reinspection fee.
(a) Prosecution for any violation of this section will not be
commenced unless notice under subdivision 2 of this subsection
has been mailed or posted on the property where the violation
exists and the violation has not been remedied within the time
specified to correct the violation or within the time granted under
any extension of such period. Failure to receive notice is not a
defense in any prosecution under this section.
Section 6 Subsection 405.11, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Heating. Every dwelling must have heating facilities
which are properly installed, are maintained in safe and good
working condition, and are capable of safely and adequately
heating all habitable rooms, bathrooms and water closet
compartments in every dwelling unit located therein to a
temperature of at least 68 degrees Fahrenheit, at a distance three
feet above floor level and three feet from an exterior wall.
Section 7 Subsection 405.13, Subdivision 5 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 5. Plumbing fixtures. Plumbing fixtures and water and waste
pipes must be properly installed and maintained in good, sanitary
working condition, free from defects, leaks and obstructions.,
properly vented and in good repair.
Section 8 Subsection 405.15, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 3. (d) Minimum Height. Habitable rooms, hallways, and
bathrooms, and basements must have a ceiling height of not less
than seven feet. Habitable basements must have a ceiling height
of no less than 6 feet 4 inches. Beams may project not more than
six inches below the required ceiling height. Not more than 50
percent of the required floor area is permitted to have a sloped
ceiling less than seven feet in height with no portion of the required
floor area less than five feet in height. The building official may
approve a reduced ceiling height for existing buildings.
Section 9 Subsection 405.17 of the Richfield City Codes is amended to read
as follows:
405.17. Responsibilities of owners and resmdents
Section 10 Subsection 406.01, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 3. Appeal of denial of permit. A person whose application
for a permit to operate a rooming house has been denied may
appeal the denial. A written notice of appeal must be filed with the
director of n„h';^ safety community development within ten dayus fo
the denial of the permit. If a notice is not filed with the director of
publiG safe+„ community development within ten days of the denial,
the council has the discretion to accept or reject the appeal.
Appeals under this section will be heard by the city council. At a
hearing under this section, the enforcement officer and the
applicant may present evidence, including witness testimony,
relevant to the permit denial. The council may affirm or reverse the
permit denial or issue conditions which must be met before a permit
will be issued.
Section 11 Subsection 407.09, Subdivision 2 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2. Local Property Manager Required. The licensee must
have a local manager for the property. The local manager must
reside within the seven-county metro area (Hennepin, Ramsey,
Anoka, Dakota, Carver, Washington, or Scott). The licensee must
provide current contact information for the local manager to the
director and report any change in local manager within three
business days.
Section 12 Subsection 407.09, Subdivision 3 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2L. 3. Display. Licenses issued under this subsection must
be displayed on the premises of the apartment house or rental
home, wherever feasible and produced upon demand of a
prospective or current tenant or the director.
Section 13 Subsection 407.09, Subdivision 4 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 3-. 4. Tenant register. The licensee must, as a continuing
obligation of its license, maintain a current register of tenants and
other persons who have a lawful right to occupancy of arca
dwelling units within the apartment house or rental home. In its
application, the licensee must designate a person or person who
will have possession of the register; and must promptly notify the
director of any change of the identity, address or telephone
numbers of such person. The register must be available for
inspection by the director at all times.
Section 14 Subsection 407.09, Subdivision 5 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 4. 5. Fees The fees for licenses required by this
subsection, as well as any penalties, are in the amounts
established in appendix D of this code.
Section 15 Subsection 407.13, Subdivision 1 (b) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 1 (b) Failure of licensee to renew rental license by February
15.
Section 16 Subsection 407.13, Subdivision 1 (d) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 1 (d) Knowingly operating a rental property in violation of
the provisions of the housing maintenance code or the zoning
regulations of the city, eincluding, without limitation occupancy
requirements.
Section 17 Subsection 408.01, Subdivision 2 (b) of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 2. (b) Upon receipt of a properly executed application, the
director of p blip safety community development, or his/her
designee, will cause an inspection to be made of the premises to
ensure the structure is in compliance with applicable provisions of
subs8ntOOHs 405.01 through 405.2-3-Section 405 of this code (the
housing maintenance code).
Section 18 Subsection 408.01, Subdivision 6 of the Richfield City Codes is
amended to read as follows:
Subd. 6. Occupancy. A person may be granted permission to
occupy a dwelling prior to issuance of the certificate upon the
approval of the director of public safety community development, or
his/her designee. The approval may be based upon undue
hardship or other extraordinary or exceptional circumstances,
provided that no such occupancy constitutes an immediate hazard.,
as determined by the director or his/her designee. Approval will not
be given until the prospective owner or designated agent has filed
on forms supplied by the city, a statement of intent to comply with
the housing maintenance code and submitted the required escrow.
Compliance dates in the statement of intent to comply will be
established by the director of p blir safe+., community
development, or his/her designee.
Section 19 The Richfield City Code is amended by repealing Subsection
405.17, Subdivisions (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) are repealed.
Section 20 This Ordinance is effective in accordance with Section 3.09 of the
Richfield City Charter.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of ,
2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM# 5.13.
r
STAFF REPORT NO. 154
' CITY COUNCIL MEETING
l
10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Jesse Swenson,Assistant HR Manager
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L.Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L.Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the approval of the resolution designating the City's contribution towards health, term life,
disability and dental insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees for 2016.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City contributes to the cost of premiums for four kinds of insurance coverages available to City employees. Full-time
General Services and Management employee contributions are discussed within this staff report as well as contributions toward
health insurance for part-time regular General Services employees. Other employees are covered under terms of labor
agreements.
The 2016 health insurance premium increase is 11.5%. This is the rate cap under the five year agreement between the Local
Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS)and Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS). This will be the fifth year of that
contract. The 2016 dental rates have increased by$0.50 for employee only coverage. The City self-insures its dental
coverage. Life insurance is in its second year of a three year contract with SunLife/NJPA. The rates will remain the same as
the 2015 contract year. Long term disability will be in its first year of a three year contract with CIGNA. The rates for this new
contract reflect a 13%decrease from 2015.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By motion: Adopt the resolution designating the City's contribution toward health,term life, disability and dental
insurance premiums for General Services and Management employees for 2016.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
LIFE
A$35,000 term life insurance policy is provided for all full-time General Services and Management employees.
The City pays the full premium for this insurance. The rate for 2016 will remain at$1.75 per month per employee.
DENTAL
The second type of insurance provided to full-time General Services and Management employees is a self-funded
group dental insurance. In 2015, the City contributed$58.50 per month per employee for the total cost of
employee(not dependent)coverage. For 2016, the City's contribution will increase to$59.00 per month per
employee. Employees who desire family coverage must pay the full cost of such additional premium, which will be
$64.00 per month for 2016—a fifty cent increase from 2015. A new tier offered in 2016 is Employee plus
Spouse. Employees who desire this coverage option must pay the full cost of such additional premium, which will
be$33.00 per month. Since dental insurance is self-funded, the City establishes the dental rates from year to
year internally, based upon administrative and benefit payout cost data. Analysis of the dental fund performance
for the past three years indicates that a rate increase is necessary.
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
The third type of insurance coverage available to full-time General Services and Management employees is group
health coverage. LOGIS will again offer plans through BCBS.
In 2016, the City will offer employees a choice of three BCBS plans, with the choice of networks in all plans. The
plans include a co-pay for services and two high deductible plans with a Health Savings Account(HSA).
Employees can choose between the Aware and Accord networks, and the BluePrint network for the$2600/$5200
High Deductible plan. The Accord network is slightly less costly because it does not include Mayo or Hazelden in
its in-network, and the BluePrint network is nine to thirteen percent less than the other two networks because it
includes only Allina Health locations in the 11-county metro area.
In an effort to remain flexible and keep rate increases as low as possible, LOGIS will continue to offer a four-tier
system, giving employees the choice of employee only, employee plus spouse, employee plus child(ren) and
family option coverage. By providing this four-tier rating system some employees are able to benefit by choosing
the employee plus spouse option or employee plus child(ren)option.
The City will continue to pay the full individual employee premium and provide an additional contribution toward
dependent coverage up to a specified ma)amum insurance premium. The health insurance premium increase for
2016 is 11.5°/x. Staff is proposing that the City increase the 2016 monthly contribution by$90 per month for
dependent coverage and$115 per month for family coverage. The 2016 City monthly contribution would then
increase to$1,135 for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren)tiers and$1,215 for the family
coverage tier.
Full-time employees have the option to waive health insurance coverage through the City. Employees electing to
waive coverage will not receive an additional monthly stipend because of the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act(ACA). The ACA could deem any incentive to employees to waive coverage as a violation of anti-
discrimination rules.
The City's contribution for Management and General Services employees, as a percent of premium over the past
several years, is shown in Attachment 1.
The 2015 and 2016 monthly premium costs of the two offered health plans are dependent on the type of network
selected: Aware, Accord or BluePrint.
2015 BCBS 2016 BCBS 2015 BCBS 2016 BCBS 2016 BCBS
Deductible w/co- Deductible w/co- $2600 Ded. with $2600 Ded. with $4000 Ded.with
pay pay HSA HSA HSA
Employee
Only $741.24 $826.50 $553.24 $617.00 $564.00
Or Or Or Or Or
$712.74 $794.50 $532.74 $594.00 $542.00
Or Or
$483.24 $539.00
Employee Plus
Spouse $1,555.74 $1,734.50 $1,160.74 $1,294.00 $1,182.50
Or Or Or Or Or
$1,495.24 $1,667.00 $1,116.24 $1,244.50 $1,138.00
Or Or
$ 1,013.74 $1,130.50
Employee Plus
Child(ren) $1,480.74 $1,651.00 $1,105.74 $1,233.00 $1,126.00
Or Or Or Or Or
$1,423.74 $1,587.50 $1,063.24 $1,185.50 $1,185.50
Or Or
$965.74 $1,077.00
Family $1,925.74 $2,147.00 $1,436.74 $1,602.00 $1,463.50
Or Or Or Or Or
$1,852.24 $2,065.00 $1,382.24 $1,541.00 $1,408.00
Or Or
$1,254.24 $1,398.50
HEALTH INSURANCE FOR PART-TIME REGULAR EMPLOYEES
The City will continue to contribute 75%of the single health care premium for part-time regular employees. The
City will also continue to pay one-half of what it pays for full-time employees towards dependent coverage. In
2016, that amount will increase to$567.50 per month for the employee plus spouse and employee plus child(ren)
tiers and$607.50 per month for the family coverage tier. Part-time employees may opt out of health insurance
altogether.
LONG-TERM DISABILITY(LTD)
The fourth type of insurance provided, and fully-funded by the City, to all full-time employees in all employee
groups is long-term disability insurance(LTD). LTD is provided through a group policy secured by the City. 2016
is the first year of a three year contract with the provider, CIGNA. CIGNA's 3-year rate guarantee came in at 13%
under the City 2015 LTD rates. The LTD rate for 2016-2018 is 21 cents per$100 of covered payroll.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etch
• The City continues to provide adequate insurance protection for the General Services and Management employee
groups, which are comparable to other City employee groups, as well as employees performing similar jobs in
comparable communities.
• By providing the same coverages, greater benefit equality is achieved between female classes found in General
Services and Management groups and male classes found in the contracted labor units.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
• The City should implement the premium increases for coverage by December 1, 2015. Payroll deductions for
January 2016 insurance payments-the beginning of the new insurance period-are calculated in December.
• Premiums for all coverages should be determined at the October 13, 2015 City Council meeting in order for staff to
be adequately prepared for open enrollment, scheduled to begin October 29, 2015.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• The funding necessary to provide for the premium contributions, as recommended, will be addressed in the 2016
Budget and within the current proposed 2016 tax levy.
• Richfield's contribution will remain about average with those of comparable metro cities.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
• In order to provide the requested insurance benefit changes, the City Council must approve the resolution
designating the City's contribution toward health, term life, long-term disability, and dental insurance premiums for
General Services and Management employees.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
• The Council may decide to adjust the City's contribution to dependent health insurance by an amount other than$90 per
month and$115 per month.
• The Council may take no action which would maintain the insurance premiums at the current 2015 funding level.
• Defer discussion to another date.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Attachment 1 Backup Material
❑ Resolution Resolution Letter
Attachment 1
The City's Contribution Toward Dependent Health Insurance as a Percent of Total Premium
Cost
YEAR HEALTH DEPENDENT CITY CONTRIBUTION CITY
CONTRIBUTION
PLAN PREMIUM MGMT./GEN. SVCS AVERAGE % OF
COST PREMIUM
2008 HealthPartners
Open Access Choice
* Employee +
Spouse $1057.86 $730 69%
* Employee +
Children $1002.29 $730 73%
* Family $1308.91 $780 60%
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $ 988.09 $730 74%
* Employee +
Children $ 933.50 $730 78%
* Family $1219.10 $780 64%
High Deductible HSA
* Employee +
Spouse $ 757.10 $730 96%
* Employee +
Children $ 715.27 $730 102%
* Family $ 934.04 $780 84%
2009 HealthPartners
Open Access Choice
* Employee +
Spouse $1226.94 $780 64%
* Employee +
Children $1162.48 $780 67%
* Family $1518.16 $830 55%
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1146.01 $780 68%
* Employee +
Children $1082.68 $780 72%
* Family $1414.98 $830 59%
High Deductible HSA$1150
* Employee +
Spouse $ 868.94 $780 90%
* Employee +
Children $ 820.92 $780 95%
* Family $1072.05 $830 77%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $ 807.87 $780 97%
* Employee +
Children $ 763.24 $780 102%
* Family $ 996.69 $830 83%
2010 HealthPartners
Open Access Choice
* Employee +
Spouse $1418.74 $855 60%
* Employee +
Children $1344.21 $855 64%
* Family $1755.49 $905 52%
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1325.16 $855 65%
* Employee +
Children $1251.93 $855 68%
* Family $1635.02 $905 55%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $ 934.16 $855 92%
* Employee +
Children $ 882.55 $855 97%
* Family $1152.50 $905 78%
2011 HealthPartners
Open Access Choice
* Employee +
Spouse $1562.16 $915 59%
* Employee +
Children $1480.10 $915 62%
* Family $1932.99 $965 50%
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1459.12 $915 63%
* Employee +
Children $1378.49 $915 66%
* Family $1800.32 $965 54%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $1032.52 $915 89%
* Employee +
Children $ 975.48 $915 94%
* Family $1274.10 $965 76%
2012 Blue Cross Blue Shield
Open Access Choice
* Employee +
Spouse $1295.00 $915 71%
* Employee +
Children $1233.00 $915 74%
* Family $1603.00 $965 60%
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1144.50 $915 80%
* Employee +
Children $1089.50 $915 84%
* Family $1416.50 $965 68%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $854.50 $915 107%
* Employee +
Children $814.00 $915 112%
* Family $1058.00 $965 91%
2013 Blue Cross Blue Shield
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1242.00 $950 76%
* Employee +
Children $1182.00 $950 80%
* Family $1537.00 $1000 65%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $927.00 $950 102%
* Employee +
Children $883.00 $950 108%
* Family $1148.00 $1000 87%
2014 Blue Cross Blue Shield
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1407.00 $990 70%
* Employee +
Children $1339.00 $990 74%
* Family $1741.50 $1040 60%
High Deductible HSA$2500
* Employee +
Spouse $1050.50 $990 94%
* Employee +
Children $1000.50 $990 99%
* Family $1300.50 $1040 80%
2015 Blue Cross Blue Shield
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1555.74 $1045 67%
* Employee +
Children $1480.74 $1045 71%
* Family $1925.74 $1100 57%
High Deductible HSA$2600
* Employee +
Spouse $1160.74 $1045 90%
* Employee +
Children $1105.74 $1045 95%
* Family $1436.74 $1100 77%
2016 Blue Cross Blue Shield
Distinctions
* Employee +
Spouse $1734.50 $1135 65%
* Employee +
Children $1651.00 $1135 69%
* Family $2147.00 $1215 57%
High Deductible HSA$2600
* Employee +
Spouse $1294.00 $1135 88%
* Employee +
Children $1233.00 $1135 92%
* Family $1602.00 $1215 76%
High Deductible HSA$4000
* Employee +
Spouse $1182.50 $1135 96%
* Employee +
Children $1126.00 $1135 101%
* Family $1463.50 $1215 83%
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION
TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE, DISABILITY AND DENTAL INSURANCE
PREMIUM FOR GENERAL SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the hospital-medical/surgical group health insurance plan is available from the
LOGIS Health Insurance program for City employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is
available from the Local Government Information Systems Association (LOGIS)for City
employees; and
WHEREAS, a self-funded group dental insurance plan is available to full-time City General
Services and Management employees and their families; and
WHEREAS, a group long-term disability program is available to City General Services and
Management employees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is required to determine by resolution the City's contribution
toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City shall contribute a maximum of$1,215
per month for family health insurance to full-time employees, and in any event, said contributions
shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. For all full-time
General Services and Management employees, the City shall also pay the $59.00 monthly
premium for the offered dental insurance plan, and the $1.75 monthly premium for the term life and
accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan, for a total possible maximum 2016
insurance premium contribution of$1,275.75 per month. The City shall contribute 75% of the
single health care premium for part-time regular employees and a maximum of$607.50 per month
towards dependent coverage. Part-time employees shall also receive a portion of short-term
disability insurance dependent upon hours worked. Such contributions shall be for coverage
effective January 1, 2016.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City shall contribute the full cost of long-term
disability insurance for full-time General Services and Management employees.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council shall determine the City's contribution
toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of the appropriate
resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective organized employee groups.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of October 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SEC-10N: CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM# 5.C.
STAFF REPORT NO. 155
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Link, Operations Superintendent
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
10/1/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the approval of the purchase of truck chassis from Nuss Truck and Equipment for
$104,981 and dump box/snow plow equipment from Towmaster, Inc. for$109,215, minus $36,000 for
trade in, totaling $178,196 plus taxes and licensing in 2016 for use by the Public Works Department.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Public Works Department currently has ten dump trucks to provide various services to the public. Staff
has evaluated the use of the trucks and can effectively reduce the fleet by one truck and not impact snow
plowing levels of service. This can be accomplished by:
1. Purchasing one tandem a)de dump truck;
2. Trading in two single a)de dump trucks; and,
3. Outfitting a chipper truck, which is typically stored over the winter, with plow equipment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve purchase of Truck Chassis from Nuss Truck and Equipment for$104,981 and
Dump Box/Snow Plow equipment from Towmaster, Inc. for $109,215, minus $36,000 for trade in,
totaling $178,196 plus taxes and licensing in 2016 for use by the Public Works Department.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Replacement schedules are set for each piece of equipment once purchased. The following are taken
into consideration when deciding on when to replace vehicles:
• Year of purchase
• Replacement date/depreciation
• History of repairs
• Technology upgrades
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etch
The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. This program
will be used for this purchase.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
Approval at this meeting will ensure delivery of the vehicle in 2016.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The 2015 Revised/2016 Proposed Budget includes $220,000 for this purchase.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment, or construction exceeds $100,000, authority
to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl:
Council may delay approval to a later meeting; however, delayed approval will result in delayed delivery.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
None
AGENDA SEC-10N: CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM# 5.D.
STAFF REPORT NO. 156
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Karen Barton, Community Development Assistant Director
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director
10/6/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the approval of the acceptance of the bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract
for Penn Avenue Street Lighting to LPD Electric, Inc. in the amount of$54,471.40 and authorize the
Community Development Director to approve additional contract work provided it does not exceed
$25,000, or the maximum of the remaining Community Development Block Grant funding, whichever is
less.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Each year the City of Richfield is awarded Federal Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funds from
Hennepin County to be used towards qualifying projects.
In September of last year and February of this year, the City Council approved a total allocation of$191,625
in CDBG funds to be used for the purchase and installation of pedestrian-scale street lights, decorative
benches, and other streetscape improvements along Penn Avenue between Trunk Highway (TH) 62 and 67th
Street.
Public Works staff hired the engineering consulting firm of SEH to prepare the work scope and bid
documents for the street light installation.
Bids for the Penn Avenue street light installation were opened on September 15, 2015. Only one bid was
received from LPD Electric, Inc. in the amount of$54,471.40. SEH deemed the bid to be reasonable and per
Hennepin County's request, has prepared a cost-analysis to substantiate that determination.
Work is scheduled to begin this fall and will be completed late spring/early summer of 2016.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: 1) Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for the installation of street
lighting on Penn Avenue between T.H. 62 and 67th Street to LPD Electric, Inc. in the amount of
$54,471.40; and 2) Authorize the Community Development Director to approve additional contract work
provided it does not exceed $25,000, or the maximum of the remaining Community Development Block
Grant funding, whichever is less.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
• The City Council approved a total of$191,625 in CDBG funding to be used for the Penn Avenue
Streetscape Improvement program.
• The street lights were purchased in March of this year and are at the City's Public Works facility
awaiting installation.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
• Penn Avenue improvement is a stated City Council goal.
• Hennepin County administers the Federal CDBG program for the City of Richfield.
• The installation of street lighting along this section of Penn Avenue is an eligible activity under the
CDBG program guidelines.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
The 2014 CDBG funds are required to be expended by December 31, 2015 and the 2015 CDBG funds
are required to be expended by December 31, 2016.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• Federal CDBG grant funds will be used to pay the contract.
• $48,202 of the allocated CDBG funds has been used to purchase the street lights.
• LPD Electric's bid for the street light installation is$54,471.40.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
• CDBG program guidelines require the contract to meet the Federal Davis-Bacon Fair Wage Act
requirements.
• Hennepin County will ensure Davis-Bacon requirements are met and adhered to.
• The City Attorney will draft the contract based on the bid document.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
Do not accept the bid from LPD Electric, Inc.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Penn Ave Street Light Bid Opening Minutes Backup Material
❑ LPD Electric, Inc. Bid Backup Material
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Bid Opening
September 15, 2015
9:00 a.m.
Penn Avenue Lighting
Bid No. 15-08
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the
meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for the Penn Avenue Lighting
Project, as advertised in the official newspaper on August 20, August 27 and
September 3, 2015.
Present: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
Chris Link, Operations Superintendent
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
Bidder's Name Bid Bond C I on- Total Bid
lusiLPD Electric Yes Yes $ 54,471.40
Prescott, W I
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the
October 13, 2015 City Council Meeting.
Elizabeth VanHoose City Clerk
The Bid is to be submitted on photocopies of this Bid Form and the attachments provided.
DOCUMENT 00 41 00
BID FORM
Total Amount of Bid $
Contractor's Name&b
Telephone t S--Dio_,t- : `i`I
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION: Penn Avenue Street Lighting
City of Richfield, Minnesota
SEH No. RICHF 432340
BIDS TO BE OPENED: 9:00 a.m. local time, Tuesday, September 15, 2015
TABLE OF ARTICLES
Page
Article1 Bid Recipient ------- .............................................. ........................................................ ...........1
Article 2 - Bidder's Acknowledgements.......................................... .................................................. .......................1
Article 3•-- Bidder's Representations..........................................................................................................................2
Article 4- Bidder's Certification.......................... ........ .......... ................... ......---.... .......................................2
Article 5- Basis of Bid -- - - -- - -- - - -- ------- --- ------- ............... .............................3
Article6 -Time of Completion ......... .........................................................................................................................4
Article 7 -Attachments To This Bid ...........................................................................................................................4
Article$ - Defined Terms...............................--------------- ............... ......._...4
Article9- Bid Submittal ............ ......... ---------.............................. ......,..................................................................5
ARTICLE 1 --BID RECIPIENT
1.01 This Bid is submitted W Karen Barton, Community Development Assistant Director
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423-2560
1.02 The undersigned Bidder proposes and agrees, if this Bid is accepted, to enter into an Agreement with
Owner in the form included in the Bidding Documents to perform all Work as specified or indicated in the
Bidding Documents for the prices and within the times indicated in this Bid and in accordance with the
other terms and conditions of the Bidding Documents.
ARTICLE 2- BIDDER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
2.01 Bidder accepts all of the terms and conditions of the Instructions to Bidders, Including without limitation
those dealing with the disposition of Bid security. The Bid will remain subject to acceptance for 90 days
after the day of Bid opening, or for such longer period of time that Bidder may agree to in writing upon
request of Owner.
Biel Form
RICNF 132340 0041 00- 1
ARTICLE 3_ BIDDER'S REPRESENTATIONS
3.01 in submitting this Bid, Bidder represents that
A. Bidder has examined and carefully studied the Bidding Documents, and any data and reference items
identified in the Bidding Documents, and hereby acknowledges receipt of the following Addenda:
Addendum No. Addendum Date
B. Bidder has visited the Site, conducted a thorough, alert visual examination of the Site and adjacent
areas, and become familiar with and satisfied itself as to the general, local, and Site conditions that
may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work.
C. Bidder is familiar with and is satisfied as to all Laws and Regulations that may affect cost, progress
and performance of the Work.
D. Bidder has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or
adjacent to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions relating to existing surface or subsurface
structures at the Site that have been identified in the Supplementary Conditions; especially with
respect to Technical Data in such reports and drawings, and (2) reports and drawings relating to
Hazardous Environmental Conditions, if any, at or adjacent to the Site that have been identified in the
Supplementary Conditions, especially with respect to Technical Data in such reports and drawings.
E. Bidder has considered the information known to Bidder itself; information commonly known to
contractors doing business in the locality of the Site, information and observations obtained from
visits to the Site; the Bidding Documents; and any Site-related reports and drawings identified in the
Bidding Documents, with respect to the effect of such information, observations, and documents on
(1)the cost, progress, and performance of the Work; (2) the means, methods, techniques,
sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by Bidder, and (3) Bidder's safety
precautions and programs.
F. Bidder agrees, based on the information and observations referred to in the preceding paragraph,
that no further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the
determination of this Bid for performance of the Worst at the price(s) bid and within the times and in
accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Bidding Documents.
G. Bidder is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by Owner and others at the Site that
relates to the Work as indicated in the Bidding Documents,
H_ Bidder has given Engineer written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that
Bidder has discovered in the Bidding Documents, and confirms that the written resolution thereof by
Engineer is acceptable to Bidder.
I. The Bidding Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and
conditions for the performance and furnishing of the Work.
ARTICLE 4—BIDDER'S CERTIFICATION
4.01 Bidder certifies that:
A. This Bid is genuine and not made in the interest of or on behalf of any undisclosed individual or entity
and is not submitted in conformity with any collusive agreement or rules of any group, association,
organization, or corporation;
B. Bidder has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other Bidder to submit a false or sham
Bid;
C. Bidder has not solicited or induced any individual or entity to refrain from bidding; and
Bid Form
004100-2 RICHF 132340
D. Bidder has not engaged in corrupt, fraudulent, collusive, or coercive practices in competing for the
Contract. For the purposes of this Paragraph 4.01.D:
1. "corrupt practice" means the offering. giving, receiving, or soliciting of any thing of value likely to
influence the action of a public official in the bidding process;
2. "fraudulent practice" means an intentional misrepresentation of facts made (a) to influence the
bidding process to the detriment of Owner, (b) to establish bid prices at artificial non-competitive
levels, or (c) to deprive Owner of the benefits of free and open competition;
3. "collusive practice,means a scheme or arrangement between two or more Bidders, with or
without the knowledge of Owner, a purpose of which is to establish bid prices at artificial, non-
competitive levels; and
4. "coercive practice" means harming or threatening to harm, directly or indirectly, persons or their
property to influence their participation in the bidding process or affect the execution of the
Contract.
ARTICLE 5— BASIS OF BID
5.01 Bidder will complete the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents for the following price(s):
UNIT PRICE BID
Est.
Item No. Description Unit Quantity Bid Unit Price Bid Price
2104.503 REMOVE SIDEWALK SF 100 $ $ 1 ,500, 00
2104.511 SAWING CONCRETE p
PAVEMENT(FULL DEPTH) LF 80 $ �-�� $ 1 U• Q(J
2104.523 SALVAGE LIGHTING UNIT EACH 14 $ 00 $
2521.501 4"CONCRETE WALK SF 100 $^ 1 . )Q� $__ 100 , dQ
2545.515 LIGHTF FO $ AUNDATION DESIGN E EACH 2 9 d -VU00
2545.523 2" NON-METALLIC CONDUIT
(DIRECTIONAL BORE) LF 450 $ Z7• $ . 00
2545.531 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1
COND NO 6 LF 1,440 $ ❑ $ WR)1 UD
2545.531 UNDERGROUND WIRE 1
COND NO 12 LF 1,440 $6 . 9, 1 $ (0a ` Q
2545.553 HANDHOLE EACH 2 $ J6. D $
2545.602 INSTALL LIGHTING UNIT EACH 16 $ 1 X70 , a $ Z44 !fir']
TOTAL BID PRICE $ rJr �1► ��
Unit Prices have been computed in accordance with Paragraph 13.03 of the General Conditions.
Bidder acknowledges that estimated quantities are not guaranteed, and are solely for the purpose of
comparison of Bids, and final payment for all Unit Price Bid items will be based on actual quantities,
determined as provided in the Contract Documents,
Bid Form
RICHF 132340 0041 00-3
ARTICLE 6—TIME OF COMPLETION
6.01 Bidder agrees that the Work will be substantially complete and completed and ready for final payment in
accordance with Paragraph 15.06 of the General Conditions on or before the dates or within the number
of calendar days indicated in the Agreement.
6.02 Bidder accepts the provisions of the Agreement as to liquidated damages.
ARTICLE 7—ATTACHMENTS TO THIS BID
7.01 The following documents are attached to and made a condition of this Bid:
A. Required Bid security.
B. Affidavit of Non-Collusion.
C. Verification of Compliance with Minnesota Statute 16C.285.
D. Contractor/Subcontractor Certification.
E. Equal Employment Opportunity Compliance Certificate.
F. Hennepin County Section 3 Clause.
G. Hennepin County Business Information Form.
ARTICLE 8--DEFINED TERMS
8.01 The terms used in this Bid with initial capital letters have the meanings stated in the Instructions to
Bidders, the General Conditions, and the Supplementary Conditions.
Bid Form
004100-4 RICHF 132340
ARTICLE 9— BID SUBMITTAL
9.01 This Bid submitted by:
If Bidder is:
An Individual
Name (typed or printed).
By: (SEAL)
(Individual's signature)
Doing business as:
A Partnership
Partnership Name: (SEAL)
By:
(Signature of general partner-attach evidence of authority to sign)
Name (typed or printed):
A Joint Venture
Name of Joint Venturer:
First Joint Venturer Name: (SEAL)
By:
(Signature of first joint venture partner-attach evidence of authority to sign)
Name(typed or printed):
Title:
Second Joint Venturer Name: (SEAL)
By:
(Signature -attach evidence of authority to sign)
Name (typed or printed):
Title:
(Each joint venturer must sign. The manner of signing for each Individual, partnership, and corporation that is
a party to the joint venture should be in the manner indicated above.)
Bid Form
RICHF 132340 —�— —_ _ 0041 00- 5
A Corporation
Corporation Name. ��r' 17 -c- t (SEAL)
State of lncorporati n: u�-s,•.
Type a usiness, Professional, Service, Limited Liability):
By.
(Signature-attach evidence of authority to sign)
Name(typed or printed):
Title: L�wte s,
(CORPORATE SEAL)
Attest.
(Signature of Corporate Secretary)
Date of Qualification to do business in rAr,L is 1) es .
(State Where Project is Located)
9.02 Contact Information
Bidder's Business Address: �^k.
Phone:^l1W Facsimile:"I111 E-mail: lokin,,
Submitted on E L r 1� 20 17
State Contractor License No. CAc03Z,1. (If applicable)
Bid Form
004100-6 RICHF 132340
DOCUMENT 00 44 14
PROJECT REFERENCES
Below is a listing of the 5 most recent projects of a similar nature to this project which we have completed.
1. Contracting Agency
Description of Work
Agency Representative
Title Phone Date of Contract
2. Contracting Agency
Description of Work
Agency Representative
Title Phone Date of Contract
3. Contracting Agency
Description of Work
Agency Representative
Title Phone Date of Contract
4. Contracting Agency
Description of Work
Agency Representative
Title Phone Date of Contract
5. Contracting Agency
Description of Work
Agency Representative
Title Phone Date of Contract
Name of Bidder
By
Project References
RICWF 132340 0044 14- 1
DOCUMENT 00 45 17
BIDDERS PROOF OF RESPONSIBILITY
If requested by Owner, this Bidders Proof of Responsibility must be submitted in accordance with Article 3.01 of
the Instructions to Bidders.
On all contracts, bidder must submit a full and complete statement sworn to before any officer authorized to
administer oaths of financial ability, equipment, experience in the work prescribed, and such other matters as the
municipality may require for the protection and welfare of the public.
The objective of the questionnaire is not to discourage bidding or make it difficult for qualified bidders to file bids.
Neither is it intended to discourage beginning contractors. It is intended to make it possible for the Owner to have
exact information on financial ability, equipment and experience involved in awarding contracts to parties
unfamiliar to the Owner. Owner reserves the right to require additional information before awarding the contract in
order to determine qualification for the work.
The contents of this questionnaire will be considered confidential.
This questionnaire is to be submitted to the following, the outside clearly marked"BIDDERS PROOF OF
RESPONSIBILITY":
Attn: Ken Taillon
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
3535 Vadnais Center Drive
St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
651.490.2000
It is recommended that this questionnaire be returned by Registered Mail.
If the Owner is not satisfied with the sufficiency of the answers to the questionnaire a financial statement may be
required or they may reject the bid or require additional information.
STATEMENT OF BIDDER'S QUALIFICATIONS
1. Name of Bidder: L C' c--k,
2. Bidder's Address:
3. When Organized:
4. Where Incorporated:
5. How many years have you been engaged in the contracting business under the present firm name:
6. Contracts on hand (attach a list of present contracts, including a schedule as to estimate completion date
and gross amount of each contract).
7. General character of work performed by your firm.
8. Have you ever failed to complete any work awarded to you:
Yes No ',: If so, attach a statement detailing where and why.
9. Have you ever defaulted on a contract-
Yes No If so, attach a statement detailing where and why.
Bidders Proof of Responsibility
RICHF 132340 004517- 1
10. Attach list of the more important contracts completed by your firm, including kind of work and approximate
cost.
11. Attach list of your major equipment.
12. Attach a statement of your experience in the construction of work similar in scope to this project.
13. Attach statement of background and experience of the principal members of your personnel, including the
officers.
14. Credit availability. Furnish written evidence, preferably from banks.
15. Additional information may also be submitted if desired.
Bidders Proof of Responsibility
0045 17-2 _ ^� - RICHF 132340
DOCUMENT 00 45 19
AFFIDAVIT OF NON-COLLUSION
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
I Hereby swear(or affirm) under the penalty of perjury;
1) That 1 am the bidder(if the bidder is an individual), a partner in the bidder(if the bidder is a
partnership) or an officer or employee of the bidder corporation having authority to sign on its behalf
(if the bidder is a corporation);
2) That the attached bidor bids have been arrived at by the bidder individually and have been submitted
without collusion with, and without any agreement, understanding or planned common course of
action with any other vendor of materials, supplies, equipment or services described in the invitation
to bid designed to limit individual bidding or competition;
3) That the contents of the bid or bids have not been communicated by the bidder or its employees or
agents to any person not an employee or agent of the bidder or its surety on any bond furnished with
the bid or bids, and will not be communicated to any such person, prior to any official opening of the
bid or bids; and
4) That I have fully informed myself regarding the accuracy of the statements made in this affidavit.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
1� y Bidde s Signature
da of 4ax•- , 2011
l Lt�SI Cn1 i
Notary Title _
KAREN W VANSOMEREN �P D Elc
NOT i�pUBLIC company
NATE�VVIGCONSIN
Affidavit of Non-Collusion
RICHF 132340 004519- 1
DOCUMENT 00 45 45
VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
WITH MN STATUTES 160.285
State of Minnesota— Responsible Contractor Requirement(for responses in excess of$50,000 only)
Minnesota Statute 16C.285, subdivision 7, IMPLEMENTATION. ... any prime contractor or subcontractor or
motor carrier that does not meet the minimum criteria in subdivision 3 or fails to verify that it meets those criteria is
not a responsible contractor and is not eligible to be awarded a construction contract for the project or to perform
work on the project... It is your sole responsibility to provide this information at the due date and time of the bid.
Minnesota Statute 16C.285, subdivision 3, RESPONSIBLE CONTRACTOR, MINIMUM CRITERIA. "Responsible
Contractor" means a contractor that conforms to the responsibility requirements in the solicitation document for its
portion of the work on the project and verifies that it meets the following minimum criteria:
Your response will be rejected unless.
(1) The Contractor:
(I) is in compliance with workers' compensation and unemployment insurance requirements;
(ii) is in compliance with Department of Revenue and Department of Employment and Economic
Development registration requirements if it has employees;
(iii) has a valid federal tax identification number or a valid Social Security number if an individual;
(iv) has filed a certificate of authority to transact business in Minnesota with the secretary of state if a foreign
corporation or cooperative;
Your response will be rejected unless:
(2) The Contractor or related entity is in compliance with and, during the three-year period before submitting
the verification, has not violated section 177.24, 177.25, 177.41 to 177.44, 181.13, 181.14, or 181.722, and
has not violated United States Code, title 29, sections 201 to 219, or United States Code, title 40, sections
3141 to 3148. For purposes of this clause, a violation occurs when a contractor or related entity:
(i) repeatedly fails to pay statutorily required wages or penalties on one or more separate projects for a
total underpayment of$25,000 or more within the three-year period, provided that a failure to pay is
"repeated" only if it involves two or more separate and distinct occurrences of underpayment during a
three year period;
(ii) has been issued an order to comply by the commissioner of labor and industry that has become final;
(iii) has been issued at least two determination letters within the three-year period by the Department of
Transportation finding an underpayment by the contractor or related entity to its own employees;
(iv) has been found by the commissioner of labor and industry to have repeatedly or willfully violated any of
the sections referenced in this clause pursuant to section 177.27;
(v) has been issued a ruling or findings of underpayment by the administrator of the Wage and Hour
Division of the United States Department of Labor that have become final or have been upheld by an
administrative law judge or the Administrative Review Board; or
(vi) has been found liable for underpayment of wages or penalties or misrepresenting a construction worker
as an independent contractor in an action brought in a court having jurisdiction. Provided that, if the
contractor or related entity contests a determination of underpayment by the Department of
Transportation in a contested case proceeding, a violation does not occur until the contested case
proceeding has concluded with a determination that the contractor or related entity underpaid wages or
penalties;
Verification of Compliance
RICRF 132340 _ 004545- 1
(3) the Contractor or related entity is In compliance with and, during the three-year period before submitting the
verification, has not violated section 181.723 or chapter 3266. For purposes of this clause, a violation
occurs when a contractor or related entity has been issued a final administrative or licensing order; *
(4) the Contractor or related entity has not, more than twice during the three-year period before submitting the
verification, had a certificate of compliance under section 363A,36 revoked or suspended based on the
provisions of section 363A.36, with the revocation or suspension becoming final because it was upheld by
the Office of Administrative Hearings or was not appealed to the office; *
(5) the Contractor or related entity has not received a final determination assessing a monetary sanction from
the Department of Administration or Transportation for failure to meet targeted group business,
disadvantaged business enterprise, or veteran-owned business goals, due to a lack of good faith effort,
more than once during the three-year period before submitting the verification;
Any violations, suspensions, revocations, or sanctions, as defined in clauses (2) to (5), occurring prior to
1 July 1, 2014, shall not be considered in determining whether a contractor or related entity meets the
minimum criteria.
r
(6) the Contractor or related entity is not currently suspended or debarred by the federal government or the
state of Minnesota or any of its departments, commissions, agencies, or political subdivisions that have
authority to debar a contractor; and
(7) Check if all subcontractors that the contractor intends to use to perform project work have verified to the
contractor through a signed statement under oath by an owner or officer that they meet the minimum
�criteria listed in clauses(1)to (6).
Minn. Stat. 16C.285, Subd. 5. SUBCONTRACTOR VERIFICATION �4N
A Prime Contractor or subcontractor shall include in its verification of compliance under subdivision 4 a list of
all of its first-tier subcontractors that it intends to retain for work on the project.
Prior to execution of a construction contract, and as a condition precedent to the execution of a construction
contract, the apparent successful prime contractor shall submit to the contracting authority a supplemental
verification under oath confirming compliance with subdivision 3, clause (7). Each contractor or
subcontractor shall obtain from all subcontractors with which it will have a direct contractual relationship a
signed statement under oath by an owner or officer verifying that they meet all of the minimum criteria in
subdivision 3 prior to execution of a construction contract with each subcontractor.
If a prime contractor or any subcontractor retains additional subcontractors on the project after submitting its
verification of compliance, the prime contractor or subcontractor shall obtain verifications of compliance from
each additional subcontractor with which it has a direct contractual relationship and shall submit a
supplemental verification confirming compliance with subdivision 3, clause (7), within 14 days of retaining
the additional subcontractors.
A prime contractor shall submit to the contracting authority upon request copies of the signed verifications of
compliance from all subcontractors of any tier pursuant to subdivision 3, clause (7). A prime contractor and
subcontractors shall not be responsible for the false statements of any subcontractor with which they do not
have a direct contractual relationship. A prime contractor and subcontractors shall be responsible for false
statements by their first-tier with which they have a direct contractual relationship only if they accept the
verification of compliance with actual knowledge that it contains a false statement.
Minn. Stat. 16C.285. Subd. 5a. MOTOR CARRIER VERIFICATION—
A prime contractor or subcontractor shall obtain annually from all motor carriers with which it will have a
direct contractual relationship a signed statement under oath by an owner or officer verifying that they meet
all of the minimum criteria in subdivision 3 prior to execution of a construction contract with each motor
carrier. A prime contractor or subcontractor shall require each such motor carrier to provide it with immediate
1 written notification in the event that the motor carrier no longer meets one or more of the minimum criteria in
subdivision 3 after submitting Its annual verification. A motor carrier shall be ineligible to perform work on a
project covered by this section if it does not meet all the minimum criteria in subdivision 3. Upon request, a
prime contractor or subcontractor shall submit to the contracting authority the signed verifications of
compliance from all motor carriers providing for-hire transportation of materials, equipment, or supplies for a
project.
Verification of Compliance
00 45 45 -2 RICHF 132340
Minn. Stat, 16C.285, Subd. 4. VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANC-__E
A contractor responding to a solicitation document of a contracting authority shall submit to the contracting
authority a signed statement under oath by and owner of officer verifying compliance with each of the minimum
criteria in subdivision 3, with the exception of clause (7), at the time that it responds to the solicitation documents.
A contracting authority may accept a signed statement under oath as sufficient to demonstrate that a contractor
is a responsible contractor and shall not be held liable for awarding a contract in reasonable reliance on that
statement.A prime contractor, subcontractor, or motor carrier that fails to verify compliance with any one of the
required minimum criteria or makes a false statement under oath in a verification of compliance shall be ineligible
to be awarded a construction contract on the project for which the verification was submitted.
A false statement under oath verifying compliance with any of the minimum criteria may result in termination of a
construction contract that has already been awarded to a prime contractor or subcontractor that submits a false
statement. A contracting authority shall not be liable for declining to award a contract or terminating a contract
based on a reasonable determination that the contractor failed to verify compliance with the minimum criteria or
falsely stated that it meets the minimum criteria. A verification of compliance need not be notarized. An electronic
verification of compliance made and submitted as part of an electronic bid shall be an acceptable verification of
compliance under this section provided that it contains an electronic signature as defined in section 325L.02,
paragraph (h).
Minn. Stat. 16C.285, Subd. 6, ADDITIONAL CRITERIA
Nothing in this section shall restrict the discretion of a contracting authority to establish additional factors for
defining contractor responsibility. This subdivision is not an independent grant of authority to a contracting
authority to establish additional minimum criteria pursuant to subdivision 3.
CERTIFICATION
By signing this document, I certify that I am authorized to sign on behalf of the company, and I swear under oath
that:
1) My company meets each of the minimum criteria to be a responsible contractor as defined in
Minn. Stat. 16C.285,
2) 1 have included a list of my fi st-tier subcontractors with my company's solicitation response;
3) If my compa4�sad a contract, I will submit a list of additional subcontractors as required.
Name of Company:
JAuthorized Signatuu�r
Printed Name: —t"I"-1-6 s r \,4\j L
Title. �-Ct
Date: "r 14 1(s _ Telephone number: "t I`� ;, - 3rc!
Before me on this day of Sxavi,Lv 20 tS personally appeared
E1.t� \Vc., known to be, who being duty sworn did depose and say that he is the
`,L L L-t ., (office)of the Contractor above mentioned that he executed the above
Verification of Compliance and Affidavit on behalf of said Contractor, and that all of the statements contained
therein are true, correc, and complete.
Attest: /)
Notary Signaturre,--
Printed Name: Y-e1 t \, �or� r-�►
My Commission expires: 1e cti. er 8 20t8
Date: tTelephone number:
Verification of Compliance
RICHF 13234Q 004545-3
LIST OF FIRST TIER SUBCONTRACTORS
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Company Telephone No.
Name of Contact
Address
Type of Construction
Verification of Compliance
004545-4 RICHF 132340
THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS
AIA Document A310
cd Boo nod
KNOW ALL €1 EN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we
LPD Electric,Inc.
N4899-1150th Street
Prescott,WI 54021
as Principal, hereinafter called Principal, and
North American Specialty Insurance Company
650 Elm Street
Manchester, NH 03101
a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of New Hampshire
as Surety, hereinafter called Surety, are held and firmly bound unto
City of Lichfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield,MN 55423
as Obligee, hereinafter called Obligee, in the sum of Five Percent(5%)of Total Amount Bid
Dollars
for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, the said Principal and the said Surety, bind ourselves, our
heirs,executors, administrators,successors and assigns,jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.
WHEREAS, the Principal has submitted a bid for (Here Insert full name,address and description of project)
Penn Avenue Street Lighting
NOW, THEREFORE, if the Obligee shall accept the bid of the Principal and the Principal shall enter into a Contract with the
Obligee in accordance with the terms of such bid, and give such bond or bonds as may be specified in the bidding or Contract
Documents with good and sufficient surety for the faithful performance of such Contract and for the prompt payment of labor and
material furnished in the prosecution thereof, or in the event of the failure of the Principal to enter such Contract and give such
bond or bonds, if the Principal shall pay to the Obligee the difference not to exceed the penalty hereof between the amount
specified in said bid and such larger amount for which the Obligee may in good faith contract with another party to perform the
Work covered by said bid,then this obligation shall be null and void,otherwise to remain in full for a and effect.
Signed and sealed this 15th day of September , 2015
1 LPID Electric,Inc.
f {Principal} (Seal)
(Witness) LAI I e
- (Title)
North American Specialty Insurance Company
{Surety) (seal)
(Witness) '
Sandra M. Doze,attorney in Fact
- - FEBRUARY 19 -THE AMERInAN
INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS,1735 N.Y.AVE.,NW,WASHINGTON,Q.C.20006
CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of Wisconsin }
)ss
County of
~ J
On this 15th day of September _ 2015 , before me appeared : �v k ,,1L��
to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did say that he/she is the �ijL.,
of LPD_Electric, Inc. a corporation,that the seal affixed to the
foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was executed in
behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and that said
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deeq of said corporation.
KAREN M.VANSOMEREN
NOTARY PUBLIC foot ry public t,►Y v�; County, s f Olt S s
STATE OF WISCONSIN
My commission expires IE 8 mmw
SURETY ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of Minnesota }
)ss
County of Hennepin J
On this 15th day of September 2015 , before me appeared Sandra M. Doze
to me personally know, who being by me duly sworn, did say that{s}he is the Attorney-in-Fact of
North American Specialty Insurance Company _.---p a corporation, that the seal
affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation and that said instrument was
executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and that said
Sandra M. Doze acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation.
is r , n.,.t•f.�� ...".ti.•• .`."s.'Vu": .':�:^!'.n.
ti
t_l>•` !_l l��' :! Notary Public Ramsey County,Mipnes9ta
My commission expires 1131/2020
NAS SURETY GROUP
NORTH AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
WASHINGTON INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY
GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,THAT North American Specialty Insurance Company,a corporation duly organized and existing under
laws of the State of New Hampshire,and having its principal office in the City of Manchester,New Hampshire,and Washington International
Insurance Company,a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Hampshire and having;its principal office in the City of
Schaumburg,Illinois,each does hereby make,constitute and appoint:
R.W.FRANK,R.SCOTTEGOINTON,JOHN E.TALLER,CRAIG REMICK,JOSHUA R.LOFFIS,TINA L.DOMASK,ROSS S.SQUIRF3,LINDA K.FRENCH,
RACHEL THOMAS,NICOLE STILLINGS.SANDRA M.DOZE,JOHN W.WAI SH,BETSY WRIGHT,JEROME T.OUIMET,KURT C.LUNDBLAD,JACK CEDARLEAF 11,
D.R.DOUGHERTY,BRIAN 1.CESTREICH,LIN LILVEN,EMILY KEISER,TED JORGENSEN,MELINDA C.BLODGETr,and R.C.BOWMAN JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY
Its true and lawful Attorney(s)-in-Fact,to make,execute,seal and deliver,for and on its behalf and as its act and deed,bonds or other writings
obligatory in the nature of a bond on behalf of each of said Companies,as surety,on contracts of suretyship as are or may be required or permitted by
law,regulation,contract or otherwise,provided that no frond or undertaking or contract or suretyship executed under this authority shall exceed the
amount of., FIFTY MILLION($50,000,000,00)DOLLARS
This Power of Attorney is granted and is signed by facsimile under and by the authority of the following.Resolutions adopted by the Hoards of
Directors of both North American Specialty Insurance Company and Washington International Insurance Company at inectings duly called and field
on the 9'h of May,2012:
"RESOLVED,that any two of the Presidents,any Managing Director,any Senior Vice President,any Vice President,any Assistant Vice President,
the Secretary or any Assistant Secretary be,and each or any of them hereby is authorized to execute a Power of Attorney qualifying the attorney named
in the given Power of Attorney to execute on behalf of the Company bonds,undertakings and all contracts of surety,and that each or any of thein
hereby is authorized to attest to the execution of any such Power of Attorney and to attach therein the seal of the Company; and it is
FURTHER RESOLVED,that the signature of such officers and the sea[of the Company may be affixed to any such Power of Attorney or to any
certificate relating thereto by facsimile,and any such Power of Attorney or certificate bearing such facsimile signatures or facsimile seal sliall he
binding upon the Company when so affixed and in the future with regard to any bond,undertaking or contract of surety to which it is attached."
aS,
By �fpFPO
L7t• rf T'•.
iE Sfcttin Y.Andrrr4n,5epior Vice President uC lYpihfaglon tntentaliorxal insurance L'ompnuy �^ L ••
s tgrsS �W)�y &Senior Vire Prr&13ear1 e.r North Amerlrap 5yseelaay Insurance Company t
�� MauP���t❑`�- 1 f.
��4l�oN r ytis �ti�
���Illrral n RVt���'� '+ �' •�
Michael A.11 o,•Se`u or ctnTo`rastt ngian n ern.�tTa'ris7 r�isu"rnncc a+'—'C npany nay
&Senior Vier President of North Amertcan specialty Inmrau re Company
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,North American Specialty Insurance Company and Washington International Insurance Company have caused their
official seals to be hereunto affixed,and these presents to be signed by their authorized officers this 12th day of May ,2015
North American Specialty Insurance Company
Washington International Insurance Company
State of Illinois
County of Cook ss:
On this_12th day of _MaY 2015 ,before me,a Notary Public personally appeared Steven P.Anderson ,Senior Vice President of
Washington International Insurance Company and Senior Vice President ofNorth American Specialty Insurance Company and Michael A,Ito,
Senior Vice President of Washington International Insurance Company and Senior Vice President of North American Specialty Insurance
Company,personally known to me,who being by me duly sworn,acknowledged that they signed the above Power of Attorney as officers of and
acknowledged said instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of their respective companies.
p=SEALNOTRRY PUMY COMMIS
I, J_e_freY_Goli6erduly elected Assistant ecrcta ,_•__ of North American Specialty Insurance Company and Washington
International Insurance Company,do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Power of Attorney given by said North
American Specialty Insurance Company and Washington International Insurance Company,which is still in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have set my hand and affixed the seals of the Companies this 75th day of September 2Q15
Jrffmy Goldberg,Vice President do Assistant secretary of
Wuhing'wn Intemational Imuranre Company&Nonh American 5peciolty Intunnce Company
LPD ELECTRIC, INC,
ERECTRICAI CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR
N4899 1150TH STREET• PRESCOTT,WI 54021
PHONE:715.262.3894 • FAX: 715.262.1127
RESPONSIBLE CONTRACTOR ACT VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
SUBCONTRACTOR FORM'
STATE OF WISCONSIN }
S5
COUNTY OF PIERCE }
Project Name:
Project No. K-�, cNV 0
I, Patrick Wood, solemnly affirm under oath that I am an owner or officer of LPD Electric Inc., ("the
Subcontractor")and state under oath that:
1. The Subcontractor meets all of the minimum criteria established in subdivision 3 of the
Minnesota Responsible Contractor Law, Minnesota Statute section 16C.285; and any
additional criteria that the contracting authority has included in the definition of responsible
contractor in the bidding documents.
2. All lower tier subcontractors that the subcontractor intends to retain have verified to the
subcontractor through a signed statement under oath by an owner or officer that they also
meet the same minimum criteria and that they have listed the subcontractors they intend to
retain. Subject to the Contractor's right to add subcontractors,those subcontractors are:
3. 1 declare under penalty of perjury that, to the best of my knowledge, everything I have
stated in this document is true.
E3y.
Its:
Subscribed and sworn to before me
This day of� %4 . � 2015.
KAREN M. VANSOMEREN
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF WISCONWN
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
AGENDA SEC-10N: CONSENT CALENDAR
AGENDA ITEM# 5.E.
STAFF REPORT NO. 157
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Melissa Poehlman, City Planner
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: John Stark, Community Development Director
10/6/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the approval of a resolution granting Site Plan Approval and Variances to allow
construction of a building addition at 7532 Lyndale Avenue.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Mr. Travis Penrod has purchased the building at 7532 Lyndale Avenue in the hopes of constructing private
music studio space for himself and his band. The building would also serve as private studio space for
painting and other creative arts. Mr. Penrod's plans include construction of a second story, full
reconstruction of the interior space, and improvements to the building facade and landscaping.
The building at 7532 Lyndale Avenue has been vacant since 2013 when Ellis Drum Shop closed. The building
was constructed in 1957 and covers a majority of the site (nearly 60%). Construction of the building was
approved with only five parking stalls. There's very little documentation regarding use of this building over the
years, but it appears to have been used for a variety of low-intensity commercial service businesses. Like a
number of the City's aging commercial buildings, these details make reuse difficult. In addition, because the
building has been vacant for over one year, all legally nonconforming status has expired. In order to fully
comply with current codes, this building would have to be torn down and the lot combined with an adjacent
property. Barrett Lawn Care was recently approved to construct an addition to their building on the site
immediately to the north of this one, which further limits the possibility of site assembly and complete
redevelopment. In order to reuse the existing building in any fashion, a number of variances will be
necessary.
Given the particulars of this situation, the proposed use is reasonable and offers a significant improvement to
site and the physical building. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed site plan and required
variances.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider these requests on September 28, 2015.
One member of the public spoke and inquired about the possibility for a higher fence on his
property, located across the alley from the address in question. Staff provided the interested party
with contact information to discuss the possibility of a variance. The Planning Commission
recommend approval of the proposed plans and related variances (4-0).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve a resolution granting site plan approval for construction of a building addition and
variances at 7532 Lyndale Avenue.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Discussed in Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etc.
The General Business (C-2) District allows for a wide variety of retail and service businesses. Site plan
approval is required prior to the construction or alteration of any building in the City.
General Requirements
The proposed building addition and site improvements will allow for reuse and aesthetic improvements to
a very difficult site. A number of variances are necessary to reuse the building; however, staff finds that
all of the variances are reasonable given the particulars of the site and the proposed use. The proposed
studio space is considered office space in terms of Code requirements.
Variances Required: Required (R), Proposed (P)
- Minimum lot width (R: 75 ft.; P: 40 ft.)
The applicant did not create this situation and site assembly is required to avoid a variance.
- Minimum lot area (R: 9,000 sq.ft.; P: 5,440 sq.ft.)
The applicant did not create this situation and site assembly is required to avoid a variance.
- Maximum impervious surface (R: 85%; P: 98%)
The existing site is 100% impervious. The applicant has added landscaping and screening in all areas in
which it is possible.
- Minimum parking setback(R: 5 ft.; P: 0-2.5 ft.)
Parking cannot be accommodated on this site without setback variances.
- Vehicle access door setback(R: 20 ft.; P: 15.5 ft.)
The vehicle access door will be over 18 feet from the traveled portion of the alley. The Public Works
Department has reviewed the proposal and finds that the anticipated infrequent use of the door makes
this acceptable.
- Off-street parking (R: 14 stalls; P: 7 stalls)
Code requires 14 parking spaces for a 4,071 sq.ft. office. Although 'office" requirements apply, the
particular use of this space as band practice space for 4-5 persons makes reduced parking reasonable.
The proposal includes 7 parking stalls. In addition, the proposal will allow for added parking lot screening
and landscaping along both Lyndale Avenue and the southern boundary of the site. Future use of this
parcel will continue to be limited to very low intensity uses.
- Pedestrian connection from sidewalk(P: None)
Parking cannot be accommodated in front of the building if a pedestrian walkway is added. Given the
low volume of traffic that is anticipated and the fact that any future use will also need to be low in terms of
intensity, it is reasonable to assume that pedestrians could safely navigate the site without a designated
walkway.
Additional information related to the requested variances and required findings can be found in the
attached document.
Noise
Requirements of Section 930 related to noise will apply. Significant work has gone into designing a
space that will provide the acoustical characteristics needed for this use and that will prevent noise from
escaping the building envelope.
General Criteria for Site Plan Evaluation
In evaluating a site plan, the Council shall consider its compliance with the following criteria which are
discussed in detail in the attached requirements document:
• Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
• Consistency with the purposes of the City Code.
• Consistency and harmony with the general appearance of neighboring developed areas and open
spaces.
• An internal sense of order and provision of a desirable environment.
• Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and landscaping, the building
materials, textures and colors.
• Adequacy of circulation and parking for all modes of transport.
• Use of energy-conserving design.
• Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties from negative environmental impacts.
Staff finds the identified criteria to be met.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
60-DAY RULE: The 60-day clock'started'when a complete application was received on September 14,
2015. A decision is required by November 13, 2015 OR the Council must notify the applicant that it is
extending the deadline (up to a maximum of 60 additional days or 120 days total) for issuing a decision.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
• A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on September 28, 2015.
• Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun Current newspaper and mailed to properties
within 350 feet of the site.
• One neighbor spoke before the Planning Commission. He did not indicate that he was against the
proposal.
• The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed site plans and variances (4-0).
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl:
• Approve the attached resolution with modifications.
• Deny the request for site plan approval with a finding that the proposal does not meet City
requirements.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Mr. Travis Penrod, applicant/owner
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Resolution Resolution Letter
❑ Required Findings Backup Material
❑ Proposed plans Exhibit
❑ Planning &Zoning Maps Exhibit
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL
OF A SITE PLAN
AND VARIANCES AT
7532 LYNDALE AVENUE
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the City of Richfield which requests
approval of site plans for a low-intensity office/private music studio on the parcel of land
located at 7532 Lyndale Avenue (the "Property"), legally described as:
LOT 11, BLOCK 25, IRWIN SHORES, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan is for a lot that is 40 feet wide and 5,440 square feet
in area; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum lot width of 75 feet and a minimum area
of 9,000 square feet in the General Business (C-2) District; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan is 98 percent impervious; and
WHEREAS, the City Code allows a maximum of 85 percent impervious surface in the
General Business (C-2) District; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan allows for parking setbacks of 0 — 2.5 feet; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum setback of 5 feet in the General
Business (C-2) District; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan includes a vehicle access door that is located 15.5
feet from the rear property line; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum setback of 20 feet for rear-facing vehicle
access doors; and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan includes space for the parking of 7 vehicles; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a minimum 14 stalls for a 4,071 square foot office;
and
WHEREAS, the proposed site plan does not include a separated pedestrian connection
from the public sidewalk to the main entrance; and
WHEREAS, the City Code requires a separated pedestrian access; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 462.357, Subdivision 6, provides for the
granting of variances to the literal provisions of the zoning regulations in instances where their
enforcement would cause "practical difficulty" to the owners of the property under
consideration; and
WHEREAS, based on the findings below, the Richfield City Council approves the
requested variances from Richfield City Code Subsections 534.11, Subd.1; 534.11, Subd. 4;
544.13, Subd. 6; and 544.15, Subd. 3; and
WHEREAS, the City has fully considered the request for approval for the site plan; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City Council makes the following general findings:
a. The Property is zoned General Business.
b. Office use is permitted in the General Business District.
C. The site and building are existing, but have been vacant for over one year.
d. Reuse of this building on this site in any fashion will require variances.
e. Code states that the minimum lot width in the General Business District is 75
feet. The existing lot is 40 feet wide. A variance from Subsection 534.11, Subd.
1 is required.
f. Code states that the minimum lot area in the General Business District is 9,000
square feet. The existing lot is 5,440 square feet. A variance from Subsection
534.11, Subd. 1 is required.
g. Code states that the maximum allowable impervious surface in the General
Business District is 85 percent. The existing lot is 100 percent impervious. The
proposal is for a site that will be 98 percent impervious. A variance from
Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1 is required.
h. Code states that the minimum setback for a vehicle access door adjacent to a
rear lot line is 20 feet. The existing building is located 15.5 feet from the rear lot
line. A variance from Subsection 534.11, Subd. 4 is required.
i. Code states that the minimum required parking for a 4,071 square foot office is
14 spaces. The proposed site plan includes 7 parking stalls. A variance from
Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1 is required.
j. Code states that a separated pedestrian connection from the public right-of-way
to the building is required. The proposed site plan does not include a separated
pedestrian connection. A variance from Subsection 544.15, Subd. 3 is required.
2. With respect to the application for variances from the above-listed requirements, the
City Council makes the following findings:
a. Strict enforcement of the Richfield Zoning Code Subsections listed above would
cause a practical difficulty. The existing property cannot be used in any fashion
without a number of the requested variances; only site assembly could alleviate
all issues. The proposed use can be adequately accommodated in the manner
indicated on the proposed site plan.
b. Unique circumstances affect the Property that were not created by the land
owner. The existing lot was created and building constructed prior to the
adoption of current Codes. The site was developed for another exceptionally
low-volume use (service and repair) with one employee. These circumstances
were created by the land owner.
C. Granting the requested variances will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood. The requested variances will allow the reuse and improvement of
a building that has been vacant for a long period of time. The improvements
proposed will benefit the surrounding neighborhood.
d. The variances requested are the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical
difficulty. The proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this
property.
e. The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance
and consistent with the comprehensive plan. The proposed variance will allow
reuse and improvement of a building on a significantly constrained site.
3. With respect to the proposed site plan, the City Council finds that it will adequately
serve the purpose for which it is proposed and will not have adverse effect upon the
public safety or general welfare.
4. Based upon the above findings, variances to the above-specified requirements are
hereby approved.
5. Based upon the above findings and variances, the proposed site plan is hereby
approved according to the terms of Richfield City Code Subsection 547.13 with the
following additional stipulations:
a) All parking stalls must be accessible year-round.
b) A final landscape plan including all material and plant selections must be submitted
for approval by Community Development and Public Works staff.
c) The applicant is responsible for obtaining all required permits, compliance with all
requirements detailed in the City's Administrative Review Committee Report dated
September 10, 2015, and compliance with all other City and State regulations.
Permits are required prior to commencement of any work;
d) That the recipient of this approval record this Resolution with the County, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes Section 462.36, Subd. 1 and the City's Zoning Ordinance
Section 547.11, Subd. 7. Proof of recording is required prior to the issuance of a
building permit;
e) Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall submit a surety
equal to 125% of the value of any improvements (based on two bids including labor
cost) not yet complete.
f) This approval shall expire one year from the date of approval unless the use has
commenced or a building permit has been obtained and construction begun.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this _ day of 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
Part 1 - Site Plan Approval (Subsection 547.13)
In evaluating a site plan, the Planning Commission and Council shall consider its
compliance with the following:
a) Consistency with the various elements and objectives of the City's long range
plans including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use
of the property for private office/studio space is not inconsistent with the guiding
Community Commercial designation. The designation of the property will remain
commercial, despite the somewhat atypical use of the property and could
continue to be used for low-intensity business in the future. Further, the
Comprehensive Plan identifies a number of goals and policies related to reuse of
existing buildings and replacement of deteriorating single-story buildings in this
corridor with multi-story buildings. The proposal is consistent with these goals
and policies.
b) Consistency with the purposes of the Zoning Code. The purposes of the Zoning
Code include: assisting in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan;
creating harmonious and workable relationships among land uses; enhancing
and protecting the physical appearance of the City and more. The proposal is
consistent with these purposes of the Zoning Code.
c) Preservation of the site in its natural state, insofar as practicable, by minimizing
tree and soil removal, and designing any grade changes so as to be in keeping
with the general appearance of neighboring developed or developing areas. The
site is already fully developed and is 100 percent impervious. The proposed
building and site have been designed so as to compliment and improve the
surrounding area.
d) Creation of a harmonious relationship of buildings and open spaces with the
terrain and with existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the
proposed development. The proposed building addition and redesign are
complimentary to the approved building on the property to the north and the
investment taking place along this block. The site design and landscaping offers
significant improvement along one of the City's major roadways.
e) Creation of a functional and harmonious design for structures and site features
including:
i. Creation of an internal sense of order for the various functions and
buildings on the site and provision of a desirable environment for
occupants, visitors and the general community;
ii. Appropriateness of the amount and arrangement of open space and
landscaping to the design and function of the development;
iii. Appropriateness of the materials, textures, colors and details of
construction as an expression of the design concept of the project and
the compatibility of the same with the adjacent and neighboring
structures and functions; and
iv. Adequacy of vehicular, cycling and pedestrian circulation, including
walkways, interior drives and parking, in terms of location and number
of access points to the public streets, width of interior drives and
access points, general interior circulation, separation of pedestrian,
cycling and vehicular traffic and arrangement and amount of parking so
as to be safe, convenient and, insofar as practicable, compatible with
the design of proposed buildings, structures and neighboring
properties.
This site is significantly constrained; however, the proposal will provide safe and
adequate space for the low-intensity use that is proposed. This site will likely
never be able to accommodate a business or use with high customer traffic or
turnover.
f) Creation of an energy-conserving design through design location, orientation and
elevation of structures, the use and location of glass in structures, and the use of
landscape materials and site grading. The proposal will decrease overall
impervious surface through the landscaping provided along the front parking lot
edges and in the boulevard area.
g) Protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through reasonable provisions
for such matters as surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers, preservation
of views, light and air, and those aspects of design, not adequately covered by
other regulations, which may have substantial effects on neighboring land uses.
Adequate provisions are in place to protect neighboring land uses from
substantial effects. A significant amount of work has gone into designing a
building that will not let sound produced inside the building escape and create a
nuisance to neighbors.
Part 2 -Variances:
A number of variances are required in order to reuse this building in any manner.
The property has been vacant for over one year and all legally nonconforming status
has expired; this includes minimum lot size and width requirements. The only
possible way to eliminate the need for variances would be to purchase and combine
the property with an adjacent lot. The following variances are requested:
- Subsection 534.11, Subd. 1:
o Minimum lot width - 75 feet (proposed 40 feet)
o Minimum lot area - 9,000 sq.ft. (proposed 5,440 sq.ft.)
o Maximum impervious surface — 85 % (proposed 98%)
o Minimum parking setback adjacent to commercial - 5 ft. (proposed 0-2.5
ft.)
- Subsection 534.11, Subd. 4 — Minimum vehicle access door setback— 20 ft.
(proposed 15.5 ft.)
- Subsection 544.13, Subd. 6 — Required off-street parking for office use is 14
stalls (proposed 7 stalls)
- Subsection 544.15, Subd. 3 — Pedestrian connection from sidewalk to entry
required (proposed none)
The findings necessary to approve variances are as follows (Subsection. 547.11):
a) There are "practical difficulties"that prevent the property owner from using the
property in a reasonable manner. It is reasonable to allow the reuse of an
existing building on an existing lot. It would be unreasonable to require the
assembly of parcels when the applicant is proposing a use that can reasonably
use and improve upon a small, constrained site. The applicant's proposal
includes improvements where possible and will improve the site overall. The
new vehicle access door will be over 18 feet from the traveled portion of the alley
and the proposed parking has been maximized. The particulars of this use and
the extreme low-intensity of this use, make these requests reasonable. With no
outside customers and adequate parking for this use, a pedestrian connection is
not necessary, nor is it possible to add.
b) There are usual or unique circumstances that apply to the property which were
not created by the applicant and do not apply generally to other properties in the
same zone or vicinity. This lot was created prior to existing codes that dictate the
minimum size and width required for a commercial property. The building was
constructed in 1957 for another exceptionally low-volume use (office and repair
of unknown type with one employee). The applicant did not create this situation,
but rather has proposed a scenario that offers reuse of a difficult property and
improvements that will be apparent to the community. There are relatively few
properties that are this constrained in the City.
c) The variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood or the locality.
The proposed variances make sense for this particular low-intensity use. The
variances will not alter or negatively impact the neighborhood; the site
improvements will enhance the area and complement the investment that other
business owners are making on this block.
d) The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty. The
proposed variances are the minimum necessary to reuse this property.
e) The variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance
and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plans are consistent
with the general purposes and intents of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive
Plan as discussed further in Part 1 of this document.
L4
� a
I
f
i
1
f
i
W9-069(Z96):XVJ W9-069(Z96):INOHd SZbss Nw'uo�6ulwoole'iso'woralnog uo"""""
LM; NH TI-09 'OZL RIAS'Zb U'IQ A ONZ aOXAlad 91AVYJ m a o LLD °z w z� o
SduO dns/Sd33NION3/Sd3NNVld MA2MS 30 a,LVOL�II aao a^ u�_
•/�U I SaUI@ V10S3N-'—IAH0Rl m W UN O W
s
m
v ma raze., '� ❑; a5
v a
0= FC wm F+[-✓gym[+R Z.J.�,(r �€Zi HOJJm mm JSP �a zJF�'-H
rW/V�7�/YJ/I Y �Y na3iN3�—_
a =
r r
17
M„9£,"OON OOIOb
w
o zz
0 5
qq
a�a�oJ uz � c a wwwzF_
L
��.EDE -w
i
jfl
Cl
�1
f a
o v
m
o
_ o. VAAAA n re ,w w,m
z �w II
r _w
Ij tlwwe« �3
INI
—W I
s v m
v
r
�� •- - 3,RZ560o00N 00'Qh�; — �zoe
AN / V
Wd9l'l0 h102 ZZ6- ^^H's9llf'Z
NN 7'I�UY�IN -
PH Z)Ill
HINON ,01 = J - A IVDS
NVId Asls (11sOdONd
vrHV 3dvDsctr l M3N Jo 3S Ott
%86�-ADVMAAOD ADVAAnS SICIUAMMNI
%Ls ADVNAAOD DNllQnIn9
DNINoz Z-D
I
�1
t7'
d
SSIDDV IES
�0"2l"LHDIl1H DN](I']If18 CI:ISOdONd
�,HJIA�I9 2I7lVM )A7
-
y
AS ore`s-azis 10-1
I o
DNIdV�SUNtl"I[I:ISOd(Hd
"3'S T LO`b-ffZIS DNTQ'iIf18
GJSoITMTd
Fri
�I
I -
'I
a
x
z� a
o U
0
LLo _
LO
r
O C
a
cc L
N ca
o 0 0 3AV m3uuvo T
> 0 0 o o
a U U U U
U U U U .N.
`J O O N
V O
o 0 o a
U
H
v+ 3AV 3IVaNAI O
1 Q N a
E @
O U U U U U U p O
U y
a � U
a
o a�
0000000 0 � o
_ LAJ a 4a E
3AV HowaIV S
O W 0 0 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 o ma
J L
L F W
N � �E= N
° 0 0 0 0 0 3 .�o
M Ln
a
LO ~ o U
UU 0
U U=p
L)L):2
a
7 x
Z� N
d
LLo
o �
LO
r
O Q
N
(Q 3AV m3uuvo a
o
a
v+ N 3AV 3lVaNAI O
N N N O
U U U U U U N O
U
an
t6LA
�
C �
K
L
U E
3AV H�RIaIV �sf+
�.�
E m m o
o
W r� Sta <n
J � _�.N c?
w Ec � w
w � �=�
w all ��
N
MEn �LL
� _ � o.
LO
1771 -F-F-F-FT-F-F1 F-F-F-F-F-F-7-F
N U of
U d d
AGENDA SEC-10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM# 7.
STAFF REPORT NO. 158
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Regis, Finance Manager
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the special assessment roll for unpaid false alarm user
fees against private property.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Richfield City Code and City Charter allow the City to specially assess delinquent false alarm user fees
against the respective properties. State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one year assessment
for these costs.
Unpaid alarm user fees must be paid to the City within 30 days from the date of written notice by the City to
the alarm user. Fees not paid within the time specified will be subject to a 10% penalty charge.
The special assessment for unpaid false alarm user fees assessed to private properties provides a means for
the City to recover costs incurred with the response by public safety to an alarm call on certain properties in
the City that turns out to be false.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the resolution adopting the assessment
for unpaid false alarm user fees against private property.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
This information is contained in the Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
• Richfield City Code section 915.07 Subd. 3 and chapter 8.02 of the City Charter allows the City to
specially assess delinquent false alarm user fees against the respective properties.
• Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one-year assessment for these
costs.
• Notice of the certification was published in the Sun Current on September 24, 2015.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
N/A
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• A 10% penalty charge is applied to all properties which have not paid within the time specified.
• The proposed special assessment for unpaid false alarm user fees from private property is
$110.00 with an additional 5% interest charge on the assessment.
• The affected property owner may prepay the original principal amount without interest within 30
days from the date the Council adopts the assessment. If the original principal amount is not paid,
the assessment will be charged 5% interest.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting
should a legal question arise.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
Do not approve the resolution and have the costs absorbed by the City.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
D Resolution Adopting Assessment For Unpaid False Alarm Resolution Letter
Fees
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
UNPAID FALSE ALARM FEES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City
Council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for unpaid
false alarm fees from private property in the City of Richfield:
Unpaid
False
Property Address Property ID Number Alarm Fee
28 W 66t Street 27-028-24-24-0061 110.00
Total $110.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of$110.00, is hereby accepted and
shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and each tract
of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed current
services in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in no more than one annual installment and shall
bear interest at the rate of five (5%) percent from the date of adoption of this
assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor and within 30 days of the date the City Council
adopts the assessment, pay the whole assessment on such property to the City's
Assessing Division without interest. Payments received after the expiration of the 30
day prepayment period, but received prior to November 16, 2015 will be charged
interest through the date of payment. Payments will not be accepted between
November 16, 2015 and January 1, 2016.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to the
County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal
taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of October, 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SEC-10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM# 8.
STAFF REPORT NO. 159
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Regis, Finance Manager
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the special assessment roll for weed elimination from
private property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one year assessment for the elimination of
public health or safety hazards or the elimination of weeds from private properties.
The special assessments are based on costs incurred by the City in connection with the abatement
of weeds or public health or safety hazards on certain properties in the City which are not properly
maintained.
The owners of the subject properties are notified by the City to take corrective action with regard to
the issue with the property. If the specific property issues were not abated within the proper time limit
the City would take the corrective action necessary and bill the property owner.
In all cases, property owners will be notified that any unpaid charges or fees may be assessed
against the property.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve the resolution adopting the assessment
for weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards
from private property.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
This information is contained in the Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etch
• The nuisance properties were not maintained by the owners and the City incurred costs to abate
the nuisance.
• Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one-year assessment for these
costs.
• Notice of the certification was published in the Sun Current on September 24, 2015.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
N/A
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• The proposed special assessment for the elimination of public health or safety hazards from
private property is$6,450.37 with an additional 5% interest penalty.
• The proposed special assessment for weed elimination from private property is $3,540.00 with an
additional 5% interest penalty.
• Costs incurred for city staff time in the cleanup of the properties or to remove the weeds are
included in the special assessment amount.
• A$25.00 administrative fee is charged to all properties.
• The affected property owner may prepay the original principal amount without interest within 30
days from the date the Council adopts the assessment. If the original principal amount is not paid,
the assessment will be charged 5% interest.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting
should a legal question arise.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl:
Do not approve the resolution and have the costs absorbed by the City.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
N/A.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
D Resolution to Adopt Nuisance Special Assessments Resolution Letter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
WEED ELIMINATION FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OR
ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY HAZARDS FROM PRIVATE
PROPERTY.
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City
Council has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to weed elimination from private property and removal or elimination of
public health or safety hazards from private property in the City of Richfield:
Public
Health or
Weed Safety
Property Address Property ID Number Elimination Hazards
1430 66TH Street East 26-028-24-13-0084 145.00 247.50
209 Pillsbury Lane 34-028-24-24-0068 290.00
2525 65th Street W 29-028-24-14-0033 145.00 200.00
6236 Bloomington Ave S 26-028-24-12-0049 290.00
6238 Thomas Ave S 29-028-24-12-0007 145.00
6245 13th Ave S 26-028-24-12-0128 130.00
6305 Dupont Ave S 28-028-24-11-0086 130.00
6308 2nd Ave S 27-028-24-12-0067 145.00
6313 Aldrich Ave S 28-028-24-11-0038 145.00
6414 Grand Ave S 27-028-24-23-0045 420.00
6515 13th Ave S 26-028-24-13-0145 145.00
6521 Stevens Ave S 27-028-24-13-0087 250.00
6529 Newton Ave S 28-028-24-23-0110 295.00
6600 4TH Ave S 27-028-24-41-0044 145.00
6701 4th Ave S 27-028-24-41-0090 290.00 425.00
6734 Pleasant Ave S 27-028-24-32-0113 145.00
6845 18th Ave S 26-028-24-44-0009 500.00
6933 Blaisdell ave S 27-028-24-34-0005 100.00
7010 Irving Ave S 33-028-24-21-0018 145.00
7144 4th Ave S 34-028-24-11-0044 495.00 250.00
7204 Stevens Ave S 34-028-24-13-0102 415.00
7224 18th Ave S 35-028-24-14-0069 145.00 455.00
7409 Oakland Ave S 35-028-24-32-0122 450.00
7538 4th Ave S 34-028-24-41-0115 250.00
7438 12th Ave S 35-028-24-31-0007 135.00
7438 Clinton Ave S 34-028-24-41-0081 145.00
7438 Elliot Ave S 35-028-24-31-0119 250.00
7529 Emerson Ave S 33-028-24-42-0134 145.00
7600 Aldrich Ave S 33-028-24-44-0065 145.00
7601 Pillsbury Ave 34-028-24-34-0047 145.00
7633 15th Ave S 35-028-24-43-0051 145.00 807.87
7645 Nicollet Ave S 34-028-24-43-0070 145.00 595.00
Total $3,540.00 $6,450.37
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of$9,990.37, is hereby accepted and
shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and each
tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed current
services in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in no more than one annual installment and shall
bear interest at the rate of five (5%) percent from the date of adoption of this
assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor and within 30 days of the date the City Council
adopts the assessment, pay the whole assessment on such property to the City's
Assessing Division without interest. Payments received after the expiration of the 30
day prepayment period, but received prior to November 16, 2015 will be charged
interest through the date of payment. Payments will not be accepted between
November 16, 2015 and January 1, 2015.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other
municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 13th day of October, 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SEC-10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM# 9.
STAFF REPORT NO. 160
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Link, Operations Superintendent
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding a resolution adopting the assessment for removal of diseased trees from
private property for work ordered in 2014.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The health of trees within municipal limits is threatened by shade tree diseases, and it is the City's
responsibility to control and prevent the spread of these diseases (City Code Section 910).
If the City has deemed it necessary to remove a diseased tree, the property owners have four options
available for private tree removal:
1. Remove the tree themselves.
2. Hire and pay for their own contractor.
3. Hire the City's contractor and pay for the removal.
4. Hire the City's contractor and request the cost of the tree removal be assessed against their property
tax
In the period from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014, 13 property owners chose the
fourth option. The total amount to be assessed is $27,235.34.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion: Approve a resolution adopting the assessment
for removal of diseased trees from private property for work ordered from January 1, 2014 through
December 31, 2014.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
In the early 1970's, the City of Richfield began a shade tree disease program to assist homeowners in
the removal of diseased trees on private property. The following process is how the City ensures
property owners are aware of their diseased tree(s).
Notification to Property Owners
At time of marking for removal, paperwork is left at the property which includes:
• Removal deadline
• Why the tree was marked for removal
• Assessment Information
• Information regarding private contractors
• Card informing City of owners removal plans
• City Staff contacts for more information
If the tree becomes hazardous or is past the removal time limit an additional deadline letter is sent to the
property owner. The letter is sent to the last known owner, obtained from Hennepin County
Property Records and verified with Richfield utility billing records.
Occupied Properties
As stated above, property owners of diseased trees have four options available for private tree removal:
1. Remove the tree themselves.
2. Hire and pay their own contractor.
3. Hire the City's contractor and pay for the removal.
4. Hire the City's contractor and request the cost of the tree removal be assessed against
their property tax.
Vacant Properties
In cases where the property is vacant and no owner can be found, removals must be ordered when trees
have passed the removal time limit or become hazardous. The City's contractor then performs the
removal and the cost is assessed to the property.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
• The work has been completed with prior approval from the affected residents; except in cases of
vacant properties.
• Minnesota State Statute requires the County to be notified of all special assessments.
• The proposed assessment was properly filed with the City Clerk.
• Notices of the assessment hearing were mailed to the owner of each parcel described in
the assessment roll on September 9, 2014, meeting the two-week notification
requirement.
• The Public Hearing Notice was published in the official newspaper on September 24,
2015.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
• The unpaid charges for the removal of the diseased trees must be special assessed for
certification to the County Director of Property Taxation and Collection along with current taxes as
stated in City Code 825.05 Subd. 3.
• Unpaid assessments must be reported to Hennepin County by November 30th of each year.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• The costs to be assessed for the removal of diseased trees on private property for work ordered
during the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, have been determined to be
$27,235.34.
• The property owner may pay the original principal amount without interest within 30 days
from the date the Council adopts the assessment. The unpaid balance will be spread over
five years with a five percent interest rate.
• The original source of funding to have the work done is through the City's Permanent
Improvement Revolving Fund.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting should a legal question arise.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl:
Council may revise the special assessment roll as deemed necessary following the public hearing.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Resolution Resolution Letter
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR
REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY
FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2014 TO DECEMBER 31, 2014.
WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the removal of diseased trees from
private properties in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for
such work ordered during the period of January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014
amount to $27,235.34.
Address PID Amount
136 E 70th 27-028-24-43-0004 $1,350.00
6220 14th Ave 26-028-24-12-0123 $1,650.00
6621 Chicago 26-028-24-31-0056 $3,218.25
6440 Washburn Ave 29-028-24-42-0067 $2,413.69
6745 Chicago 26-028-24-31-0066 $1,126.39
6804 Russell Ave 29-028-24-44-0043 $2,091.86
6813 Upton Ave S 29-028-24-43-0021 $5,800.00
6856 Oliver Ave 28-028-24-33-0145 $1,000.00
6915 Nicollet Ave 27-028-24-43-0074 $1,448.21
7000 Lakeshore 33-028-24-21-0001 $1,287.30
7040 1 st Ave 34-028-24-12-0016 $1,800.00
7312 Blaisdell Ave 34-028-24-24-0091 $1,823.68
7433 Upton Ave 32-028-24-42-0011 $2,225.96
TOTAL $27,235.34
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the amount of$27,235.34, is hereby accepted
and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein, and
each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed
current services in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable in no more than five annual installments and
shall bear interest at the rate of five (5%) percent from the date of adoption of this
assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property to the City's Assessing Division, and may at any time thereafter, pay to the
City's Assessing Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid,
with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made.
Such payment must be made before November 12 or interest will be charged
through December 31 of the next succeeding year.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County and such
assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other
municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of October,
2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
AGENDA SEC-10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM# 10.
STAFF REPORT NO. 161
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Link, Operations Superintendent
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding resolutions pertaining to the annual 77th Street Project Area assessment
process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Since 1988, the City has performed special maintenance along the 77th Street Redevelopment Area between
1-35W and Cedar Avenue. The current services include:
• Maintenance and operation of irrigation systems
• Mowing
• Fertilization
• Weed control
• Trash and litter removal
These current services are provided on both sides of the 77th Street wall. The maintenance functions are
funded through a maintenance assessment on 77th Street commercial properties.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion:
• Approve a resolution adopting the assessment on the 77th Street Project Area for costs incurred
to maintain the area for 2014.
• Approve a resolution ordering the undertaking of current service project
(maintenance) within the 77th Street Project area for 2016.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
• City staff has determined the actual assessment costs of current services for 2014 for this area to
be $71,499.01.
• The estimate for 2016 maintenance is $80,000.
• Fluctuations in expenditures for maintenance of the 77th Street Redevelopment area are caused
by a number of factors:
• Weather determines water usage and irrigation costs
• Concrete repair varies from year to year
• Updating aging infrastructure
• Replantings
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etch
• Section 825 of the City Code indicates "current services" mean one or more of the following:
(a) snow, ice, or rubbish removal from sidewalks;
(b) weed elimination from streets or private property;
(c) removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding
any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, sections 463.15 to
463.26;
(d) installation or repair of water service lines;
(e) street sprinkling, sweeping, or other dust treatment of streets;
(f) the trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees from any street;
(g) the treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private property;
(h) the repair of sidewalks and alleys;
(i) the operation of a street lighting system;
(j) the maintenance of landscaped areas, decorative parks and other public amenities on or
adjacent to street right-of-way; and,
(k) snow removal and other maintenance of streets in commercial redevelopment areas.
• Council ordered the work and the work was completed for 2014.
• Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a policy for assessing the costs.
• Commercial property owners will be assessed on a per-square-foot basis; however, all single
family and multi-family residential properties, plus the two churches in the area, would be exempt
from the special assessment levy.
• The proposed assessment was properly filed with the City Clerk.
• Notice of the public hearing for the proposed maintenance costs in 2014 was mailed to all
owners described on the assessment roll on September 9, 2015 meeting the two-week
notification requirement.
• The Public Hearing Notice was published in the official newspaper on September 24, 2015.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
Each year, by September 1, the City shall list the total unpaid charges for current services against each
separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable under section 825 of the City Code. This list is
available at the offices of the City Clerk, Assessing, and Public Works.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• All costs to the City will be recovered through this assessment.
• Estimated and actual costs for the 77th Street maintenance services from 2002-2014 are:
Year Estimate Actual
2002 $80,000 $75,490.39
2003 $80,000 $59,831.07
2004 $80,000 $63,842.79
2005 $80,000 $64,841.54
2006 $80,000 $69,606.52
2007 $80,000 $77,441.46
2008 $80,000 $77,000.01
2009 $80,000 $62,894.55
2010 $80,000 $64,124.81
2011 $80,000 $72,427.48
2012 $80,000 $78,286.46
2013 $80,000 $59,779.82
2014 $80,000 $71,499.01
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting
should a legal question arise.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Resolution(2014) Resolution Letter
❑ Resolution(2016) Resolution Letter
❑ Assessment Roll Backup Material
❑ Map of ILN/77th St Assessment District Backup Material
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT ON
77TH STREET MAINTENANCE FOR THE PERIOD
JANUARY 1, 2014 TO DECEMBER 31, 2014
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to maintenance of the 77th Street Project Area, which is approximately
bounded east of 1-35W and west of Cedar Avenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Such proposed assessment roll in the total amount of $71,499.01 is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by
the proposed current services in the amount of assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 2015 and shall bear interest at
the rate of five percent (5%) from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property to the City's Finance Division and may, at any time thereafter, pay to the
City's Finance Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made. Such
payment must be made before November 12 or interest will be charged through
December 31 of the succeeding year.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner in other municipal
taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of October,
2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING THE UNDERTAKING OF
CURRENT SERVICE PROJECT WITHIN THE 77TH
STREET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY
1, 2016 TO DECEMBER 31, 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to ordinance, the City Council of the City of Richfield did
establish a special assessment district and did propose that certain current services be
undertaken by the City in the 77th Street Project Area, approximately bounded by I-
35W, 77th Street, 1-494 and Cedar Avenue and that the cost of such services be
specially assessed against benefited property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield did also by such resolution
set the date of the public hearing on the undertaking of such current service project and
the levying of special assessment to bear the cost thereof; and
WHEREAS, following due notice, such public hearing was held on October 13,
2015 at which time all interested parties desiring to be heard were given an opportunity
to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. That the following examples of current services of the City shall be undertaken by
the City within the 77th Street Project Area, which area constitutes the special
assessment district with the exception of residential properties, plus the two
churches in the area, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against
the benefited property within the district:
a. Snow, ice or rubbish removal;
b. Weed elimination;
c. Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private
property, excluding any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26;
d. Installation and repair of water service lines;
e. Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets;
f. Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees;
g. Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian walkways;
h. Operation of the street lighting system;
i. Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent
to street right-of-way; and
j. Snow removal and other maintenance of streets.
2. The work to be performed may be by day labor, by City force, by contract or by any
combination thereof.
3. The designated period of the project shall be from January 1, 2016 through
December 31, 2016. Costs of the project shall be in the manner provided in the
Richfield Ordinance Code.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of October,
2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
61 .-I M n N n .--I M m O O n N 0 ✓1 w n M l ✓1 M n n m N m m C N C m l M O N -ZT w n m 07 w w v v .--I N
.-I m C M N ✓1 01 O l0 l0 00 O O l0 ✓1 o� o� t0 N ✓1 M -i N O N M n lq n lq N n n C lq lq N c1 -i -i -i N O� m l0
m O N N O1 vt N vt n tD 00 tD vl .-I O t0 N N � O .-I m 0 .-I Ot N Ot n O] n vt C M N .-I n vt M M M M M N M N vt
N �(1 l0 N l0 O ✓1 n .-I .-I .-I l0 d1 l0 N M N ✓1 rl N n l0 M .-I m vl m n vl .-I .-I 00 n H n n n n ✓1 O c
l0 M M .-I N 01 N n .-I ✓1 l0 � � M C n t0 {/T O C .--� M N ✓1 N C O .'-� n .-I M �fl 01 n 0 .'-� M ✓1 C C C C t0 n 0 .--�
VT VT �y`VT VT VT V}V} c-I th N th th th t/}t/}t/} ^VT �VT VT VT VT VT c-I VT VT VT VT VT VT V} c-I V}th th th th th t/} n M � N
i/) Vl N 4R 4A i/) Vl Vl Vl 4R 4A
M lD m m o n N O o N o O O N M o O M M M M m m m O o o N o to o O m O O o o O . . . . o o o
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O N N N N N O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o . . . . 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a C M M M M C M M C C M a a C C C C C C C C C C C a a C M C C M M C C a a M M M M M M M M M
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
m m m m m m m m m 00 00 00 W W W W W W m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 00 00 00 W W W W W W W W W
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
� in in � in in in
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
� H
w u J U w Z J
Z Z H O
d r F I w
s O w O p rc u r > J
U r : J p
Z U Q w w w
Z a O' > w C7 in w w w w in in _
J u u u u U U
Q w a F w m O
Z Z O a H u l7 l7 F Z w w N
d w w J in in w > Z w J J w r F W W W
U U U Z �_ �_ 0 0 0 0
z J Q Q O O O O p o a - - z o o v� v� v� J Q O Nl d O J J O a a w w w w O
o x x x s o J w r r u z
o p p z z z z z z < u Y u u u a W W d d d J H m d W = Q Q Z O z z z z Z Z Z
m z x > > o z `C u d p a r r r r a s
u- z z i� i� i� a u u o 0 o u d o > > o
z 0 0 0 0 a a w z g o 0 0 z z o Q z o o w y y w = N Q o o
m m m m m m m vi - - z z z z
o 'g w ol o m a z a
a n n n Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a m m u u u u u u u u u o 0 o o o =1=1=1= - x 2 2 2 2 212 2 �2
m m
w w l7 U'
Z Z Z Z
VI VI (n 1n In Q Q N
N N
W W > W > Q Q > > > 2 > > 2 > W W W W w> u u> > Q > a z z a s a r Q a r Q > > > > > u u a a n o v Q > o o n o o > n y Q o w y moa Q Q a Q z z �
> r r F a > w r w r r r Q Q Q > j a r r F m O z w w w w w a a r
J a a a s Q a a m -- m -- -- a m a Q m m a a a a a o o
O Z Z m m r T m W M O N r z J � � m � m m m r o o w r Z J O n m 00 J W O Z Z Z Z O W W �
n Z n n m .-I n n n d N � d n Q n Q n n n V1 d d U �l N d � d n n n d � d � � Zn
O O
00
C O M O
vt vt vt vt .-I N rl N
O O N O .--i 0 0 ✓t O C M O O ti C O ti O m O m m .--I C O N N O C N O C C C C O
in n n n a a n n .n .n .n n n n n n n o n m m � n n in n n n n n m in in n
0 01 C m N n -ZT x m m .-I M N m O M .--I
N M W M M vt vt N
w M N al vl n n M N I n NI tp O1 n o m
n O N n n Ol 00 m l0 � 00 � n M M .--I n 41 O 41
m l0 M C C r-I l0 i11 C N n rl 41 � � t0 n N {/T .-I Vl l0 C
VT VT VT VT VT VT VT V}V} �y`V} c-I ih ih t/} �t/} VT ut c-I
v1 v1 ul in n
CO n .-I M Q 00 � tD n O M � V1 W lD
O M W l(1 Ltl N M 0 n O 0 N 00 O 0 0 0 ll)
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-I .-I .-I .-I O c-I
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m
M a C M M C C C M C C C M M a C C C C C C M
� Q Q Q Q Q
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
D0 D0 D0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 OO OO OO W W 00 00 00 00 D0 D0 D0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
in a a � � � �
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
U U
z z w w w J
J V, C7 U r O a z z z z
J z z o G a x o 0 0 o z J
M
U Z Z Z Z w
JO O W d' N N Vf Vf W
z o x x z_ a n a
Jd C C tw/1 a W W O Z Z Y Y Y Y W O
a a o 0 0 = a a a ~ ~ z z z z 0 w
amu
z z to Z K d ~ Q Q K K K K Z
O w w 2 w 0 a J in a a a a a a
x , � w r Q l:l l7 l7 l7 l7 l7 a D
m = = 0 = C7 c2� K O J V > Z Z Z Z Z Z :::i O
w U U U Q G_' _ m d z Y Y Y Y Y Y W O
> > > > >
0
z tD
� Vf N Vf VI
z_
> > > a a > > z > a w
a a a W y 3 W 3 > a a x a } a
w O w
J a a m Q m a a a m
O m O vt vt vt vt n vt O 00 .-I tD O .-I O O N vt N
O O
N m n lD lD C M n n N n M lD .-I n lD lD lD n
E.■ '■.®ice�■ - � -- 1---r w ■ ' i�
1 - 10 — ---- -----1 , _
son
—
h£
_ n-
_ n
1
NMI . ■ *,--�-- 1
I 9-WrAt-
on owel" -12
mma
I�
e
■.
4+1+
al-
8:
.-
a
1.
,'I� 0000 �'I -1112 _
■ . • g08 ■
ORR—
A
I WE ■- u-
�1. a
. F.
�1�F.r FFFF���� � � •,
AGENDA SEC-10N: PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA ITEM# 11.
STAFF REPORT NO. 162
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Link, Operations Superintendent
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Kristin Asher, Public Works Director
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Public hearing regarding resolutions pertaining to the annual Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) maintenance
assessment process.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet(LHN) maintenance assessment was established to recover special maintenance
expenses in the LHN area in 1981. The current services include irrigation, weeding and mowing of
landscaped areas. The LHN Redevelopment Area is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th
Street, and Emerson Avenue (map attached).
Staff is recommending the City Council:
1. Assess $29,415.52 against the LHN properties for work done in 2014.
2. Propose a similar assessment process for 2016.
At the July 8, 2014 Special City Council Worksession the Council discussed the possible elimination
of the LHN Maintenance District. Elimination of the Maintenance District was considered for the
following reasons:
• 66th Street Reconstruction in 2016
• Elimination of the "original" landscape features from the district
• New rules for establishing Maintenance Districts
This topic will be discussed again at a Special City Council Worksession on October 27, 2015. At
this meeting the following will be discussed:
• Current 66th Street Reconstruction Project Schedule (2018)
• Possible elimination of the district before the reconstruction of 66th Street
• If eliminated, potential cost to the General Fund
Staff has received calls from the property owners of Lakewinds and Wendy's questioning the
proposed assessments. They dispute whether they are receiving benefit from the maintenance items
that they are being assessed for and will likely be in attendance at the public hearing.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Conduct and close the public hearing and by motion:
• Approve a resolution adopting the assessment on the Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) district for
costs incurred to maintain the area for 2014.
• Approve a resolution ordering the undertaking of current service project within the
Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet (LHN) district for 2016.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
• City staff has determined actual costs of current services to be assessed for the 2014
maintenance of this area to be$29,415.52, and the estimated cost for 2016 maintenance to be
$50,000.
• Fluctuations in expenditures for maintenance of LHN are caused by a number of factors:
• Weather determines water usage and irrigation costs
• Concrete repair vary from year to year
• Update aging infrastructure
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes.etch
• Section 825 of the City Code indicates "current services" mean one or more of the following:
(a) snow, ice, or rubbish removal from sidewalks;
(b) weed elimination from streets or private property;
(c) removal or elimination of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding
any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, sections 463.15 to
463.26;
(d) installation or repair of water service lines;
(e) street sprinkling, sweeping, or other dust treatment of streets;
(f) the trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees from any street;
(g) the treatment and removal of insect-infested or diseased trees on private property;
(h) the repair of sidewalks and alleys;
(i) the operation of a street lighting system;
(j) the maintenance of landscaped areas, decorative parks and other public amenities on or
adjacent to street right-of-way; and,
(k) snow removal and other maintenance of streets in commercial redevelopment areas.
• Council ordered the work and the work was done for 2014.
• Notice of the public hearing for the proposed maintenance costs in 2014 was mailed to all
owners on the assessment roll on September 10, 2015, meeting the two-week notification
requirement.
• Notice of the public hearing was published in the official newspaper on September 24,
2015.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
Each year, by September 1, the City shall list the total unpaid charges for current services against each
separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable under section 825 of the City Code. This list is
available at the offices of the City Clerk, Assessing, and Public Works.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• All costs to the City will be recovered through this assessment.
• Estimated and actual costs for the LHN maintenance services from 2002-2014 are:
Year Estimated Actual
2002 $50,000 $35,136.62
2003 $50,000 $37,785.67
2004 $50,000 $44,031.39
2005 $50,000 $45,385.31
2006 $50,000 $45,648.56
2007 $50,000 $51,605.29
2008 $50,000 $49,999.99
2009 $50,000 $49,747.02
2010 $50,000 $32,459.40
2011 $50,000 $39,090.87
2012 $50,000 $32,244.51
2013 $50,000 $25,522.16
2014 $50,000 $29,415.52
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
No legal issues are apparent at this time. The City Attorney will be in attendance at the Council meeting
should a legal question arise.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S .
Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Property owners on the assessment roll.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
❑ Resolution(2014) Resolution Letter
❑ Resolution(2016) Resolution Letter
❑ Assessment Roll Backup Material
❑ Map of LHN Assessment District Backup Material
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR
LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN) MAINTENANCE FOR
THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 2014 TO DECEMBER 31, 2014
WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council
has met and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for current
services related to maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment
Area, which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and
Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. Such proposed assessment roll, in the total amount of $29,415.52 is hereby
accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named
therein, and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by
the proposed current services in the amount of assessment levied against it.
2. Such assessment shall be payable before or during 2015 and shall bear interest at
the rate of five percent (5%) from the date of adoption of this assessment resolution.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such
property to the City's Finance Division, and may, at any time thereafter, pay to the
City's Finance Division the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with
interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which payment is made. Such
payment must be made before November 12 or interest will be charged through
December 31 of the succeeding year.
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment roll to
the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County and such
assessment shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal
taxes.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 13th day of
October, 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ORDERING UNDERTAKING OF CURRENT
SERVICE PROJECT LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET (LHN)
MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 2016 TO DECEMBER 31, 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to ordinance, the City Council of the City of Richfield did
establish a special assessment district and did propose that certain services be
undertaken by the City in the Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet Redevelopment Area approximately
bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue and that the
cost of such services be specially assessed against benefited property; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield did also by such resolution
set the date of public hearing on the undertaking of such current service project and the
levying of special assessment to bear the cost thereof; and
WHEREAS, following due notice, such public hearing was held on October 13,
2015 at which time all interested parties desiring to be heard were given an opportunity
to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the following examples of current services of the City shall be undertaken by
the City within the LHN Redevelopment Project Area, which area constitutes the
special assessment district with the exception of single family, two family and
multifamily residential properties, with the cost of such services to be specially
assessed against the benefited property within the district:
a. Snow, ice or rubbish removal;
b. Weed elimination;
c. Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private
property, excluding any structure included under the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26;
d. Installation and repair of water service lines;
e. Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets;
f. Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees;
g. Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian walkways;
h. Operation of the street lighting system;
i. Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent
to street right-of-way; and
j. Snow removal and other maintenance of streets.
2. The work to be performed may be by day labor, by City force, by contract or by any
combination thereof.
3. The designated period of the project shall be from January 1, 2016 through
December 31, 2016. Costs of the project shall be collected in the manner provided in
the Richfield Ordinance Code.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 13th day of
October, 2015.
Debbie Goettel, Mayor
ATTEST:
Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk
m C M O� n N n l0 O . C - C . N M N mlzr O m O . M M m O m m n . n N l0 M m m ✓1 l0 N
D� n a oq C r-I 00 n M m 0 ✓) ✓1 m C n m N C N: 't l0 n M -i N ✓1 00 n Lq N � O� m N 0 l0 ✓1
n i � O w W e t O m m M t m N O � w n i m M i m n v m .-I v M O] M n O ci N ci m O t w - v
Oo rl l0 .--I w w N C 00 rl .--I N M O x m O O m w w l0 m ul N w vl l0 O �!1 w m w N w m N H O m x m �--�
N D� O �+l N O� N N il} M M �Il �Il {/} rl N W N �--I lD N {A � lD ✓1 ✓1 N rl N M e-I C n L} e-I m V}{/} H C r-I r-I � �--� C
N N � c-I c-I c-I ih ih ih ih ih ih ih ih 1h to �4A 4/T �4/?lR lR lR lR lR lR lR �V? ih ti ih ih ih ih �to �
m O ti C N N n o0 C M O C O O ✓1 m O O . . n 0 l0 M m n m vt t0 n vl l0 N .-I N C n o�
lD lD lD lD W L!1 W 00 00 l!1 n C lD m m n n �--� N m N M M Lfl n 00 00 0 0 0 4P O m m m M
O O O O O C O O O O O O O .-I O O rl ti O O M M ti ti ti ti O ti ti O O ti O O O ti ti ti O O ti ti ti ti
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
M N M M M M M M M . M M . . . . M M M N M N N �--I � M N M M M M M M M N N N N
N N N N N M N N N .--I N N .ZT .-I N N N N rl It It .-I N N N M N M M C N 4 C N N N N N -ZT .ZT M M M M
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a . . . . . . a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
WW W W W O] W 00 00 00 00 00 CO CO � W W W W W W W W W W W W W W O] 00 00 00 00 CO CO �
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n n n n n n n n n n n n co n n n n n w w w w n n n n n n n w n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
M d
w O in a in
0 = O J J � J
O
a o z a s a z a
Q Q wa 0 w J = O a 0 u u u �
a o w x J N a v m -uu
w ❑ w
o¢ � o g ❑ ❑ w � > �� �Z ZJ z0 -- - ¢ F w - i , � m wd wd 00 00 F-- z z z z
z .ti ti d w w p w w vi = w Q 0 0 0 w w ❑ a a Z Z v = u y cY < < <
Y w F a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ¢ ¢ ¢ a a a a
Z w O w H H Q ~ Z K K K K K ~ ~ H ¢ J w 2 2 N N N >
a a J u x x K K F Y O Q Q Q H Q O 2 2 ¢ Q Q a a a a
U U w w w w Q Q Q Q Q r r r u� w J H in in z vi
m H Q a Y a a eX d ❑ U l7 0 l7 C7 V1 V1 V1 ❑ = w Z ❑ ❑ ❑ w w a a a w Y Y Y Y
ww o o J ° ❑ Q z a a a a a a a a LL a z > LL LL LL w - w w w o 0 0 0
� � � m m O O ❑ a a � ❑ � N � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ � - � � � Y Y Y Z �
_ w = _ _ ¢ ¢ ¢ O O O O
LL 3 w z z m Q z a > i i i i i i i " w z w � a a a z o 0 0 0
. Q m m m z u u u ❑ x x x ❑ Y z d d z z z x LL 3 3 3 3
❑ ❑ ❑
w w w
O O O O O Z Z Z
z_ z_ z_ z_ z_
Vf N N
� Vf Vf Vf Uf � V1 V1 N N 1n ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ In U] U] U] VI VI VI VI VI VI UI (/1
w w w w w w w Z Z Z Z Z w w w w w w ¢ w w ❑ ¢ ¢ w
>
3�o wJz >waz� >waz� >waz� wJz waz� waz� oF oF wz wz wz� �w❑Q �w❑Q �w❑Q �w❑a �w❑a wz� wz� waz� >waz� > �w ~ aJ aJ aJ az aF Yg❑ 3F >aJw >aw �wZ>❑ �wZ>❑
>¢ Q d Q Q Q 3 wwQ
a a aa
0 0 o zoa Qwz
3w
O O m O O O C C m V1 n m O . O N O N N N N N 0 0 N lD O 0 0 m O C 0 O 0 Vl N N 0 n
N O m O O � � � M N �O M O ti N ti N � � � � � O N � � 0 0 � N � 0 0 M � 0 0 0 0 � � � 0 0
N �n .-I .-I M t0 C C C C C C � C C C vt vt �n l0 �n n W C vt t0 a a n vl n a a t0 C
lD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD lD lD lD lD lD lD lD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD tD
sell® 11�® A E
u
®Q®
I ...............
i
,mg
F. .
Ilea . 8. B328�
l31 i7 F GF G r.E74+ ��ti F.�
7 �
� �■ 12289ei o E 1�;of 2 1 /
/ 1
'�aB OB �F� 90x2. o
a��� ��r�a��� �~■F�1�.�i1� LOf
ai _ '����rF���iii
MINIMUM � ,. . .
1 iN �.'�� FI�r• H H■.a F
gal
®®�� ���.�.' �� �� ��"■.�,� � � Iii �����.iJ.�
mulm
JQ�7- POP',",
� � �■ ���i��l�m ®F1 l,1� Faaai�' "'>�" .,'�.... � I � � • i71�• — r
ti ti�■
r
---------------
- --- ---'
tb FI IOU
C G.�G E S ALyr' fa
AGENDA SECTION: RESOLUTIONS
AGENDA ITEM# 12.
STAFF REPORT NO. 163
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Chris Regis, Finance Manager
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of a resolution awarding the sale of$5,695,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series 2015B.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In 2006 the City issued two separate bond issues, the $6,080,000 G.O. Water&Sewer Revenue Bonds,
Series 2006A and the $2,500,000 Storm Sewer Bonds Series 2006B. Both bonds were issued to fund various
capital projects within the water&sewer and storm sewer utilities.
Interest rates continue to be at low levels, and the City's fiscal consultant, Ehlers &Associates, Inc.
periodically reviews the City's outstanding bond issues to determine which issues, if any are feasible
for refunding. Upon the latest review of the bond issues, Ehlers &Associates, Inc. recommends
undertaking a bond refunding of the Series 2006A and 2006B to take advantage of the low interest
rates and realize interest savings. For this refunding the savings is estimated to be $663,939.
The type of refunding being presented is a current refunding. In a current refunding transaction, the
bonds being refunded will either all mature or be redeemed within 90 days or less from the date of
issuance of the refunding issue. The City would then begin to make payments on the newly issued
"refunding bonds."
Accordingly, the Series 2015B bonds are being issued to provide funds sufficient for a current
refunding on February 1, 2016. The par amount of the Series 2006A and Series 2006B to be called
on the call date is $3,935,000 and $1,645,000 respectively.
Bids on the 2015B General Obligation Refunding Bonds are due in the offices of Ehlers &
Associates, Inc. on Tuesday October 13, 2015. A representative from Ehlers &Associates, Inc. will
be at the City Council meeting to recommend the successful bidder and review attached documents,
and provide information that is absent from the resolution and available only after the bidding on the
bonds has closed.
Following Ehlers &Associates, Inc. recommendation it would be appropriate for the City Council to
award the bond sale to the qualified buyer and undertake other related actions as necessary as
delineated in the approving resolution. The anticipated closing on the 2015B Bonds is scheduled for
November 10, 2015.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Approve the resolution awarding the sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series
2015B, in the original aggregate principal amount of$5,695,000; Fixing their form and specifications;
Directing their execution and delivery; and Providing for their payment; and Providing for the
redemption of bonds refunded thereby.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
The call for the sale of the bonds was approved by the City Council at the September 8, 2015 City
Council meeting.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
N/A
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
The sale of the refunding bonds at this time will allow the City to take advantage of the low interest rates
and realize interest savings.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
• On the basis of Ehlers &Associates, Inc. review, it appears that the current interest rate climate
makes it feasible to refund the two bond issues.
• The current outstanding principal balance of the 2006A and 2006B bonds is$3,935,000 and
$1,645,000 respectively. The City will continue to make the principal and interest payments up to
and on the refunding date.
• The $5,695,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2015B are being issued to provide funds for a
current refunding on February 1, 2016, on all of the City's callable G.O. Water & Sewer Revenue
Bonds, Series 2006A and callable G.O. Storm Sewer Bonds, Series 2006B.
• It is estimated that this refinancing under current rates would reduce the interest costs of paying
these two debt issues by approximately $663,939.
• This savings expressed in present value terms is around 10.604% of the refunded principal or
$591,707.
• The bonds are being issued for an 11-year period; this does not extend the term of the original
issue. The maturity date of the new refunding issue will be the same as the two current outstanding
issues.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
Legal counsel has been involved in the bond sale transactions as bond counsel to the City.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(Sl:
None.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers &Associates, Inc.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
D 2015B Award of Sale Resolution Resolution Letter
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City of
Richfield,Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Tuesday, October 13, 2015,
commencing at 7:00 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which
had been received for the purchase of the City's General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015B, to
be issued in the original aggregate principal amount of$5,695,000.
The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been received in the manner
specified in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds. The proposals were as set forth in EXHIBIT A
attached.
After due consideration of the proposals, Member then introduced the following
written resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its
adoption:
469094v1 JAE RC145-693
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL
OBLIGATION REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2015B, IN THE
ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $5,695,000;
FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING
THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; PROVIDING FOR
THEIR PAYMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION
OF BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota
(the"City") as follows:
Section 1. Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Authority.
(a) Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475, as amended(collectively,
the "Act"), the City issued its General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds,
Series 2006A (the "Series 2006A Bonds"), dated May 18, 2006, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $6,080,000, currently outstanding in the principal amount of $4,210,000,
$3,935,000 of which is subject to redemption on or after February 1, 2016. The proceeds of the
Series 2006A Bonds financed the construction of improvements to the City's water and sewer
systems, including capital improvements to the water plant (the "Water and Sewer
Improvements").
(b) Pursuant to the Act, the City issued its General Obligation Storm Sewer Bonds,
Series 2006B (the "Series 2006B Bonds"), dated December 21, 2006, in the original aggregate
principal amount of $2,500,000, currently outstanding in the principal amount of $1,760,000,
$1,645,000 of which is subject to redemption on or after February 1, 2016. The proceeds of the
Series 2006B Bonds financed the construction of improvements to the City's storm sewer system
(the"Storm Sewer Improvements").
(c) The City is authorized by Section 475.67, subdivision 3 of the Act to issue and
sell its general obligation bonds to refund obligations and the interest thereon before the due date
of the obligations, if consistent with covenants made with the holders thereof, when determined
by the City Council to be necessary or desirable for the reduction of debt service costs to the City
or for the extension or adjustment of maturities in relation to the resources available for their
payment.
(d) It is necessary and desirable for the reduction of debt service costs to the City
that the City issue its General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2015B (the "Bonds"), in the
original aggregate principal amount of $5,695,000, pursuant to the Act, specifically
Section 475.67, subdivision 3, to refund the outstanding principal amount of the Series 2006A
Bonds and the Series 2006B Bonds (together,the "Refunded Bonds") on February 1,2016.
(e) The City is authorized by Section 475.60, subdivision 2(9) of the Act to negotiate
the sale of the Bonds, it being determined that the City has retained an independent financial
advisor in connection with such sale. The actions of the City staff and municipal advisor in
negotiating the sale of the Bonds are ratified and confirmed in all aspects.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 2
1.02. Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. The proposal of (the
"Purchaser") to purchase the Bonds is hereby determined to be a reasonable offer and is accepted, the
proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of$ (par amount of$5,695,000, [plus original
issue premium of$ ,] [less original issue discount of$ ] less underwriter's discount
of$ ),plus accrued interest to date of delivery,if any,for Bonds bearing interest as follows:
Year Interest Rate Year Interest Rate
2017 % 2023 %
2018 2024
2019 2024
2020 2026
2021 2027
2022
True interest cost: %
1.03. Purchase Contract. The sum of $ being the amount proposed by the
Purchaser in excess of $5,638,050, shall be credited to the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or
deposited in the Redemption Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the Finance Manager in
consultation with the City's municipal advisor. The Finance Manager is directed to retain the good faith
check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of
the unsuccessful proposers. The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the
Purchaser on behalf of the City.
1.04. Terms and Principal Amounts of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell the
Bonds pursuant to the Act, specifically Section 475.67, subdivision 3, in the total principal amount of
$5,695,000, originally dated November 10, 2015, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral
multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and which mature
serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
2017 $ 2023 $
2018 2024
2019 2024
2020 2026
2021 2027
2022
(a) $4,020,000 of the Bonds (the "Series 2006A Refunding Bonds"), maturing on
February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to refinance the Water and
Sewer Improvements through the redemption and prepayment of the outstanding Series 2006A
Bonds:
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 3
Year Amount Year Amount
2017 $ 2023 $
2018 2024
2019 2024
2020 2026
2021 2027
2022
(b) The remainder of the Bonds in the amount of $1,675,000 (the "Series 2006B
Refunding Bonds"), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below,will be
used to refinance the Storm Sewer Improvements through the redemption and prepayment of the
outstanding Series 2006B Bonds:
Year Amount Year Amount
2017 $ 2023 $
2018 2024
2019 2024
2020 2026
2021 2027
2022
1.05. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1,2024,and on any day thereafter to
prepay Bonds due on or after February 1,2025. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the
option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are
called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 8 hereof) of the particular amount of
such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such
maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such
maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
[1.06. Mandatory Redemption; Term Bonds. To be completed if Term Bonds are requested by the
Purchaser.]
Section 2. Registration and Pam.
2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest
thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft
issued by the Registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment
date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available
for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been
paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication,
or(ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case the Bond will be
dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of
each year, commencing August 1, 2016, to the registered owners of record as of the close of business on
the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month,whether or not that day is a business day.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 4
2.03. Registration. The City will appoint, and will maintain, a bond registrar, transfer agent,
authenticating agent and paying agent (the"Registrar"). The effect of registration and the rights and
duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows:
(a) Re ig ster. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond
register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the
registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or
exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory
to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized
by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the
designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for
registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment
date and until that interest payment date.
(c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for
exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate
principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in
writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be promptly
cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar
for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the
endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the
requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in
good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether
the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the
principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a
registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the
liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner
thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee
or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is
destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity
date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in
lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the
reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a
Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the
Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the
Registrar an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 5
as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds
so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such
cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already
matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a
new Bond prior to payment.
(i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption,notice thereof
identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the
redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be
redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the
notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or
any defect therein,will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds
so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date,provided that
the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of Initial Re_ig strar. The City appoints Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are
authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or
consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust
company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as
successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the
services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days' notice and upon
the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash
and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor
Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of the City Council, the
Finance Manager must transmit to the Registrar monies sufficient for the payment of all principal and
interest then due.
2.05. Execution,Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction
of the City Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City
Manager,provided that all signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals.
If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such
officer before the delivery of any Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and
sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery.
Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any
security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has
been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates
of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed
certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered
under this resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City
Manager will deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with
the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the
application of the purchase price.
2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one
or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B attached hereto
with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond.
Upon the execution and delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and
cancelled.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 6
Section 3. Form of Bond.
3.01. Execution of Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially the form
set forth in EXHIBIT B attached hereto.
3.02. Approving Legal Opinion. The City Manager is authorized and directed to obtain a copy
of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota,
which is to be complete except as to dating thereof and cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany
each Bond.
Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants.
4.01. Debt Service Fund. The Bonds will be payable from the General Obligation Refunding
Bonds, Series 2015B Debt Service Fund(the "Debt Service Fund") hereby created. The Debt Service Fund
shall be administered and maintained by the Finance Manager as a bookkeeping account separate and apart
from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The City will continue to
maintain and operate its Water Fund, Sewer Fund, and Storm Sewer Fund,to which will be credited all gross
revenues of the water system, sewer system, and storm sewer system, respectively, and out of which will be
paid all normal and reasonable expenses of current operations of such systems. Any balances therein are
deemed net revenues (the "Net Revenues") and will be transferred, from time to time, to the Debt Service
Fund,which Debt Service Fund will be used only to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds and any other
bonds similarly authorized. There will always be retained in the Debt Service Fund a sufficient amount to
pay principal of and interest on all the Bonds, and the Finance Manager must report any current or anticipated
deficiency in the Debt Service Fund to the City Council. There is also appropriated to the Debt Service Fund
amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the
Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.03 hereof.
4.02. Redemption Fund. All proceeds of the Bonds, less the appropriations made in
Section 4.01 hereof and the costs of issuance of the Bonds, will be deposited in a separate fund (the
"Redemption Fund") to be used solely to redeem and prepay the Refunded Bonds. Any balance
retraining in the Redemption Fund after the redemption of the Refunded Bonds on February 1, 2016 (the
"Redemption Date") shall be deposited in the Debt Set-vice Fund herein created for the Bonds.
4.03. Prior Debt Service Fund. The debt service funds heretofore established for the Refunded
Bonds pursuant to the resolutions providing for the issuance and sale of the Refunded Bonds (the "Prior
Resolutions") shall be closed following the redemption of the Refunded Bonds, and all monies therein
shall be transferred to the Debt Service Fund herein created.
4.04. Debt Service Coverage. It is hereby determined that the estimated collection of the
foregoing Net Revenues will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet
when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds and that no tax levy is needed at this time.
4.05. Pledges in Prior Resolutions. The pledges and covenants of the City made by the Prior
Resolutions relating to the Water and Sewer Improvements and the Storm Sewer Improvements financed
with the proceeds of the Refunded Bonds are restated and confirmed in all respects. The provisions of the
Prior Resolutions are hereby supplemented to the extent necessary to give full effect to the provisions
hereof.
4.06. Certification of Taxpayer Services Division Manager as to Registration. The City
Manager is directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 7
Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota and to obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the
Act.
Section 5. Refunding of Refunded Bonds; Findings; Redemption of Refunded Bonds.
5.01. Purpose of Refunding. The Series 2006A Bonds will be called for redemption on the
Redemption Date in the principal amount of$3,935,000, and the Series 2006B Bonds will be called for
redemption on the Redemption Date in the principal amount of $1,645,000. It is hereby found and
determined that based upon information presently available from the City's municipal advisor, the
issuance of the Bonds, a portion of which will be used to redeem and prepay the Refunded Bonds, is
consistent with covenants made with the holders of the Refunded Bonds and is necessary and desirable
for the reduction of debt service costs to the City.
5.02. Application of Proceeds of Bonds. It is hereby found and determined that the proceeds of
the Bonds deposited in the Redemption Fund, along with any other funds on hand in the debt service
funds established pursuant to the Prior Resolutions, will be sufficient to prepay all of the principal of,
interest on and redemption premium(if any) on the Refunded Bonds.
5.03. Redemption; Date of Redemption; Notice of Call for Redemption. The Refunded Bonds
maturing after February 1, 2016 will be redeemed and prepaid on the Redemption Date. The Refunded
Bonds will be redeemed and prepaid in accordance with their terms and in accordance with the terms and
conditions set forth in the forms of Notice of Call for Redemption attached hereto as EXHIBITS C-1 and
C-2, which terms and conditions are hereby approved and incorporated herein by reference. The
registrars for the Refunded Bonds are authorized and directed to send a copy of each Notice of Call for
Redemption to each registered holder of the Refunded Bonds at least thirty days prior to the Redemption
Date.
Section 6. Authentication of Transcript.
6.01. City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to
prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds certified copies of
proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the
City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within
their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to
the validity and marketability of the Bonds and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, will
be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein.
6.02. Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Finance
Manager are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and
circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their knowledge and
belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made
therein as of the date of the Official Statement.
6.03. Other Certificates. The Mayor, City Manager, and Finance Manager are hereby
authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates as are required as a
condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds or
the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at the closing the Mayor,the City Manager, and
the Finance Manager shall also execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of
material litigation, and the Finance Manager shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for
and delivery of the Bonds.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 8
6.04. Payment of Costs of Issuance. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount
of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to K1einBank, Chaska, Minnesota, on the
closing date for further distribution as directed by the City's municipal advisor, Ehlers &Associates, Inc.
Section 7. Tax Covenant.
7.01. Tax-Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of
the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action
which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended (the"Code"), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect
at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all
affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become
subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as
hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds.
7.02. Rebate. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish
and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code,
including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on
amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds.
7.03. Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the
Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be
"private activity bonds"within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code.
7.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations.
(a) $5,580,000 in principal amount of the Bonds (the "Deemed Portion") is hereby
deemed to be "qualified tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the
Code,because the City determines that:
(i) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of
the Code;
(ii) the Refunded Bonds were qualified tax-exempt obligations;
(iii) the average maturity date of the Bonds is not later than the average
maturity date of the Refunded Bonds; and
(iv) the Bonds have a maturity date which is not later than the date which is
30 years after the date the Refunded Bonds were issued.
(b) The remaining portion of the Bonds in the principal amount of $115,000 (the
"Designated Portion")is hereby designated as"qualified tax-exempt obligations"within the meaning
of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, because the City determines that:
(i) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section 141 of the
Code;
(ii) the City hereby designates the Designated Portion of the Bonds as
"qualified tax-exempt obligations"for purposes of Section 265(b)(3)of the Code;
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 9
(iii) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than
private activity bonds, that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the
City during calendar year 2015 will not exceed$10,000,000; and
(iv) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during
calendar year 2015 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3)of the Code.
7.05. Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal
procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section.
Section 8. Book-EmU System; Limited Obligation of City.
8.01. DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or
printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.04 hereof. Upon initial
issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in
the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its
successors and assigns ("DTC"). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be
registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede&Co., as nominee of DTC.
8.02. Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the
Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent
will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers,banks and other financial institutions from
time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the"Participants") or to any other
person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any
responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any
Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any
other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the
Registrar), of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the
payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount
with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the
Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration
books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of
principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with
respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of,premium, if
any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the
registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy
and discharge the City's obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest
on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds,
as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the
obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Manager of a written notice to the effect
that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words "Cede & Co."
will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Manager will
promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent.
8.03. Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket
Issuer Letter of Representations (the"Representation Letter") which will govern payment of principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds. Any Paying Agent or
Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action
necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter with respect to the Registrar and
Paying Agent,respectively,to be complied with at all times.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 10
8.04. Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City
Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds
that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the
Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the City will issue,
transfer and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in
accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its
services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its
responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities
depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in
accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method
of payment thereof.
8.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to the
contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with
respect to principal of,premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and notices with respect to the Bond will
be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC's Operational Arrangements as set forth
in the Representation Letter.
Section 9. Continuing Disclosure.
9.02. Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. "Continuing Disclosure Certificate"
means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and City Manager and dated
the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended from time
to time in accordance with the terms thereof.
9.01. City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City hereby
covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing
Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of the City to
comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of default with respect
to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate,
including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the City to comply with its
obligations under this section.
Section 10. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged as
provided in this section, all pledges,covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the
Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full
payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and effect. The City may
discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum
sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be
discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest
accrued to the date of such deposit.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 1 1
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member
, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 12
Passed and adopted this 13t1i day of October, 2015.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 13
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSALS
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 A-1
EXHIBIT B
FORM OF BOND
No. R- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF RICHFIELD
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING BOND
SERIES 2015B
Date of
Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP
February 1, 20 November 10, 2015
Registered Owner: Cede &Co.
The City of Richfield, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the"City"), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received
promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of
$ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the
annual rate specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing August 1, 2016,
to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether
or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation
and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by
check or draft by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, as Registrar, Paying
Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution
described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively
become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably
pledged.
The City may elect on February 1, 2024, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or
after February 1, 2025. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and
in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption,
the City will notify The Depository Trust Company("DTC") of the particular amount of such maturity to
be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant's interest in such maturity to be
redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to
be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of$5,695,000 all of like original
issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued
pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on October 13, 2015 (the "Resolution"), for the
purpose of providing money to refund the outstanding principal amount of certain general obligation
bonds of the City, pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the City and the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475, as
amended, specifically Section 475.67, subdivision 3. The principal hereof and interest hereon are payable
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 B-1
primarily from net revenues of the water system, sewer system, and storm sewer system of the City, as set
forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby
conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the
City Council has obligated itself to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event
of any deficiency in net revenues pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or
amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of$5,000 or
any integral multiple thereof of single maturities.
The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as "qualified
tax-exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended(the "Code") relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within
the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is
transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Registrar, by the registered owner
hereof in person or by the owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender hereof together
with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or
the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized
denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in
the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at
the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental
charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
The City and the Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered
as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment
and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Registrar will be affected by any notice to the
contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts,
conditions and things required by the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the
State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance
of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its
terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the
issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, charter, or
statutory limitation of indebtedness.
This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under
the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Registrar by
manual signature of one of its authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Richfield, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this
Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and City Manager
and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below.
Dated: October 13,2015
CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
(Facsimile) (Facsimile)
Mayor City Manager
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 B-2
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within.
WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION
By
Authorized Representative
ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be
construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations:
TEN COM--as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
Custodian
(Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors
Act, State of
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in common
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does
hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint attorney to transfer the said
Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the
premises.
Dated:
Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears
upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change
whatever.
Signature Guaranteed:
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 B-3
NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities
Transfer Agent Medallion Program ("STAMP"), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program ("SEMP"), the
New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program ("MSP") or other such "signature
guarantee program" as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STAMP,
SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee
requested below is provided.
Name and Address:
(Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is
held by joint account.)
Please insert social security or other identifying
number of assignee
PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION
The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the
books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below.
Signature of
Date of Registration Registered Owner Officer of Re isg tray
Cede & Co.
Federal ID#13-2555119
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 B-4
EXHIBIT C-1
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
FOR SERIES 2006A BONDS
$6,080,000
CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION WATER AND SEWER REVENUE BONDS
SERIES 2006A
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that,by order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County,Minnesota(the"City"),there have been called for redemption and prepayment on
February 1,2016
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds,
Series 2006A, dated May 18, 2006, having stated maturity dates of February 1 in the years 2017 through
2027,both inclusive, totaling$3,935,000 in principal amount,and with the following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity Amount CUSIP Number
2017 $285,000 763325 Q67
2018 300,000 763325 Q75
2019 310,000 763325 Q83
2020 325,000 763325 Q91
2021 340,000 763325 R25
2022 350,000 763325 R33
2023 370,000 763325 R41
2025 790,000 763325 R66
2027 865,000 763325 R82
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2016, on which date
all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for redemption are
requested to present their bonds for payment at the main office of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,
Saint Paul,Minnesota,on or before February 1,2016,at the following address:
Rea istered/Certi ied Mail: Air Courier: In Person:
Wells Fargo Bank,N.A. Wells Fargo Bank,N.A. Wells Fargo Bank,N.A.
Corporate Trust Operations Corporate Trust Operations Northstar East Building
P.O. Box 1517 N9303-121 608 2nd Ave. So., 12ffi Fl.
Minneapolis,MN 55480-1517 6th&Marquette Avenue Minneapolis,MN
Minneapolis,MN 55479
Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of
2003, the paying agent is required to withhold a specified percentage of the principal amount of the
redemption price payable to the holder of any bonds subject to redemption and prepayment on the
469094v1 JAE RC 145-693 C-1-1
redemption date, unless the paying agent is provided with the Social Security Number or Federal
Employer Identification Number of the holder,properly certified. Submission of a fully executed Request
for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9, will satisfy the requirements of this
paragraph.
Dated: ,20 .
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
By: /s/ Steve Devich
City Manager
City of Richfield,Minnesota
469094v1 JAE RC 145-693 C-1-2
EXHIBIT C-2
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
FOR SERIES 2006B BONDS
$2,500,000
CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION STORM SEWER BONDS
SERIES 2006B
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that,by order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County,Minnesota(the"City"),there have been called for redemption and prepayment on
February 1,2016
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Storm Sewer Bonds, Series 2006B, dated
December 21, 2006, having stated maturity dates of February 1 in the years 2018 through 2027, both
inclusive, totaling$1,645,000 in principal amount,and with the following CUSTP numbers:
Year of Maturity Amount CUSIP Number
2018 $245,000 763325 T31
2020 265,000 763325 T56
2023 445,000 763325 T80
2027 690,000 763325 U47
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1, 2016, on which date
all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the bonds hereby called for redemption are
requested to present their bonds for payment at the main office of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association,
Saint Paul,Minnesota,on or before February 1,2016,at the following address:
Registered/Certified Mail: Air Courier: In Person.--
Wells
erson:Wells Fargo Bank,N.A. Wells Fargo Bank,N.A. Wells Fargo Bank,N.A.
Corporate Trust Operations Corporate Trust Operations Northstar East Building
P.O. Box 1517 N9303-121 608 2nd Ave. So., 12t'Fl.
Minneapolis,MN 55480-1517 6th&Marquette Avenue Minneapolis,MN
Minneapolis,MN 55479
Important Notice: In compliance with the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of
2003, the paying agent is required to withhold a specified percentage of the principal amount of the
redemption price payable to the holder of any bonds subject to redemption and prepayment on the
redemption date, unless the paying agent is provided with the Social Security Number or Federal
Employer Identification Number of the holder,properly certified. Submission of a fully executed Request
for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification, Form W-9, will satisfy the requirements of this
paragraph.
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 C-2-1
Dated: 120
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
By: /s/ Steve Devich
City Manager
City of Richfield,Minnesota
469094v1 JAE RC145-693 C-2-2
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS.
CITY OF RICHFIELD )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Richfield,
Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "City"), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached
and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on
October 13, 2015, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct
copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of the City's General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, Series 2015B, in the original aggregate principal amount of$5,695,000.
WITNESS My hand officially as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this day
of 12015.
City Clerk
City of Richfield, Minnesota
(SEAL)
469094v1 JAE RC145-693
AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS
AGENDA ITEM# 13.
STAFF REPORT NO. 164
..;f _.f_.. ..{ CITY COUNCIL MEETING
VN 10/13/2015
REPORT PREPARED BY: Theresa Schyma, Deputy City Clerk
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
OTHER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: N/A
CITY MANAGER REVIEW: Steven L. Devich
10/7/2015
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Consideration of the City Council's confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of an Housing and
Redevelopment Authority(HRA) Commissioner.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the November 14, 2011 Special City Council Worksession, the City Council determined that the public's
interest is best served by having a composition of two appointed Council Members serve on the HRA and
three Mayor-appointed citizens.
Mayor Debbie Goettel was appointed to a five-year HRA term on November 9, 2010 to a term that
ends on October 31, 2015 or until such later date as a successor is appointed and qualified.
To ensure a quorum at future HRA meetings, the City Council should make an appointment at
tonight's meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
By Motion: Confirm the Mayor's appointment of an HRA Commissioner for a five year term
commencing November 1, 2015 and expiring October 31, 2020.
BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION:
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
This information is contained in the Executive Summary.
B. POLICIES(resolutions,ordinances,regulations,statutes,etcy
• Under State law, the Mayor appoints HRA Commissioners subject to confirmation of the
City Council.
• The Mayor has indicated an appointment will be made to the HRA for a five year term at
the October 13, 2015 City Council Meeting.
C. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES:
• To ensure a quorum at future meetings, the City Council should appoint an HRA
Commissioner on October 13, 2015.
• If the City Council does not approve the Mayor's appointment, a quorum may not be
present at future HRA meetings.
D. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
This designation is at no additional cost to the City.
E. LEGAL CONSIDERATION:
None.
ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S):
• The City Council could decide not to confirm the Mayor's appointment.
• The City Council could defer the appointment to a future City Council Meeting.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING:
None.