9-8-97 agenda•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1997
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
AUGUST 25, 1997; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL BUDGET MEETING OF AUGUST
27, 1997; AND (3) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL BUDGET MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3,
1997
PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION OF QUALITY OF EXCELLENCE AWARD FOR PLAYGROUND
IMPROVEMENTS IN CITY OF RICHFIELD FROM EARL F. ANDERSEN, INC.
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 227
2. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING FIRST ANNUAL
NATIONAL FAMILY HEALTH AND FITNESS DAY AT VETERANS MEMORIAL
PARK OF RICHFIELD ON SEPTEMBER 28, 1997
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 228
3. PRESENTATION OF WOOD LAKE NATURE CENTER HOME MADE MAPLE
SYRUP TO COUNCIL MEMBERS
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 229
INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ARE REQUESTED TO
PRINT THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE SPEAKER'S REGISTER FOR THE
RECORD.
• 4. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
ON THE AGENDA
AGENDA APPROVAL
• 5. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE
ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER
COUNCIL ACTION IS NECESSARY. HOWEVER, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY
REQUEST THAT AN ITEM BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND
ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE
RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION REQUESTING
HENNEPIN COUNTY ASSISTANCE IN OVERSIGHT OF MINNEHAHA CREEK
WATERSHED DISTRICT C.L. 230
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL
LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING THIS OLD APARTMENT PROGRAM IN
RICHFIELD C.L. 231
C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT FOR WEED DESTRUCTION AGAINST PROPERTY OWNER
IN AMOUNT OF $244.95 C.L. 232
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT FEES AGAINST PROPERTY
OWNER IN AMOUNT OF $5,026.07 C.L. 233
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
SPECIAL LAW 1997, CHAPTER 233, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 46 CONCERNING
RICHFIELD POLICE AND FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATION BENEFIT
MULTIPLIER C.L. 234.
F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF UPDATED 1998-1999 COMMUNITY
HEALTH SERVICES PLAN C.L. 235
G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REJECTION OF ALL BIDS FOR
RESURFACING OF 64TH STREET BETWEEN PORTLAND AND NICOLLET
AVENUES C.L. 236
H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY- CELEBRATION EVENT
LICENSE WITH FEE WAIVER.TO RICHFIELD VISIONS, INC. FOR RICHFIELD
CATTAIL DAYS ON SEPTEMBER 20 AND 21, 1997 C.L. 237
RESOLUTIONS
7. CONSIDERATION OF 1997 REVISED/1998 PROPOSED BUDGET
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING 1998 PRELIMINARY PROPERTY TAX LEVY, TRUTH
IN TAXATION HEARING DATES AND CANCELING 1998 AD VALOREM LEVY
. FOR CURRENT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 238
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
• 8. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF TRANSITORY ORDINANCE
PROVIDING FUNDING FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FROM
SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 239
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
9. CONSIDERATION OF EXPENDITURE NOT TO EXCEED $100,000 FROM
STORM WATER UTILITY FUND TO ASSIST IN CREATING REGIONAL
RETENTION POND TO RELIEVE FLOODING AT FOUNTAINHEAD
APARTMENTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH PONDING FOR GALYAN'S TRADING
CO.
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 240
10. CONSIDERATION OF REVIEW OF CONCEPT DESIGN AND AGREEMENT WITH
SHORT ELLIOT HENDRICKSON TO DEVELOP PLANS AND BID
SPECIFICATIONS FOR NEW MAINTENANCE FACILITY FOR CITY OF
RICHFIELD ADJACENT TO WATER PLANT IN VETERANS MEMORIAL PARK OF
RICHFIELD
• COUNCIL LETTER NO. 241
AIRPORT BUSINESS
11. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
12. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
COUNCIL CHOICE
13. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
14. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
15. ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request.
• Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the Administrative
Services Director at 861-9702.
10
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 241
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Review of concept design and consideration of agreement with Short Elliot Hendrickson
(SEH) to develop plans and bid specifications for a new maintenance facility for the City
of Richfield adjacent to the Water Plant in Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield.
Background:
On January 27, 1997 the City Council took action to select a site in Veterans Memorial
Park of Richfield adjacent to the Water Plant as the site for a new City maintenance
facility. On April 14, 1997 the Council authorized an agreement with Short Elliot
Hendrickson (SEH) to provide professional services for programming and preliminary
design of a new City of Richfield maintenance facility on the selected site.
The process SEH used to program and develop a preliminary design involved many
meetings. They began with all City staff who would be involved with the building; and,
eventually, as the concept design developed it was reviewed in various stages by the
City Council, the Community Services Commission, the Planning Commission and,
most recently, by the public at an Open House meeting.
• Several items were discussed at length at the commissions' meeting of August 12,
1997. Traffic from the facility as it would relate to the 64th Street and Portland Avenue
intersection and park users was a major concern. Planning the building for the future to
maximize staff and equipment efficiency was discussed. The need for an exercise
room was discussed, pro and con, but not resolved. Some members thought this might
be a red flag type item to many people but others thought it was state-of--the-art
planning for the 90's and reduced insurance claims substantially. Funding was also a
major concern and the fact that borrowing would be necessary was discussed.
The major concerns at the Open House on August 28, 1997 were:
• traffic, both in the park and on Portland Avenue,
• why this particular site had been selected versus the airport sites or staying in the
current location, and
• the use of parkland as a building site.
Traffic concerns will be a major item in the next phase of design and will be handled
with the same meeting process that resolved many of the questions answered in the
preliminary design.
r1
U
10-I
•
Funding for the project will be provided from the following sources:
$1,000,000 Land Sale Proceeds-HRA
750,000 Land Sale Proceeds-77th Street
1,000,000 Utility Fund-Fund Balance
200,000 Central Garage Fund-Fund Balance
500,000 Pension Reserve
750,000 Capital Fund-Fund Balance
$4,200,000 Total Funds Available
The preliminary design is completed and needs to be approved. Estimated total project
cost is $5.6 million. Council is also being asked to approve the City entering into an
agreement with SEH to prepare specifications and plans for the bidding and
construction portion of the work. This agreement would be under the general master
consulting agreement SEH has with the City. This agreement would have a limit not to
exceed $246,100. Breakdown of tasks and time schedules would be as outlined in
Work Agreement No. 2 attached.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the concept. plan and authorized Work Order No. 2, not to exceed $246,100,
with Short Elliot Hendrickson for preparation of specifications and plans for the bidding
and construction of a new maintenance facility for the City of Richfield in Veterans
Memorial Park of Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The concept plan, with an estimated total project cost of $5.6 million, is in keeping
with Council direction and the needs of the community.
2. Short Elliot Hendrickson and the City of Richfield have a master consulting
agreement under which professional services were provided under Work Order
No. 1 for the programming and preliminary design phase of the new maintenance
facility and under which professional services could be provided for the
preparation of specifications and plans for the bidding and construction portion of
the project through Work Order No. 2.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not build a new maintenance facility. However, the Council has previously
determined this would not be in the best interest of the community.
2. Build a smaller maintenance facility. However, the Council has previously
indicated this would not be in the best interest of the community.
•
/D a.
3. Enter into agreement with another firm for provision of professional services to
prepare specifications and plans for the bidding and construction of a new
maintenance facility. However, SEH is most familiar with the project, has the
capability of providing the necessary services, and has offered a reasonable
market rate for provision of those services.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is on the agenda of the September 8, 1997 meeting of the Richfield City
Council. Action is requested at this time. Should Council chose to delay action, the
time frame~for bidding and construction may need to be significantly altered.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame Prosser
City ager
JDP:cak
C
•
/o J3
WORK ORDER NO. Two
Authorization to proceed and site-specific scope of services
Project: City Maintenance Facility Bidding/Construction Phase Location: Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield
We transmit the following information for your use:
Your letter dated August 29. 1997 outlining services which the Richfield Council accented on September 8 1997
We hereby authorize you to proceed with the following phases of services for the above-referenced Project and
location in accordance with the agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER dated Mav 9. 1996.
2.3 "C" Phase -Design Development (Preliminary Design Phase)
2.4 "D" Phase -Construction Documents (Final Design Phase)
2.5 "E" Phase -Bidding or Negotiating Phase
2.6 "E" Phase -Construction Phase
Payment shall be on the basis of (select from the following):
^ Cost Plus Fee: Direct Salary Cost times audited overhead plus fee of _ percent and reimbursable
expenses.
^ Cost Plus Fixed Fee: As for Cost Plus Fee, however total Fee shall not exceed
^ Lump Sum: One sum payable by percent of completion of the Services (includes costs, expenses and fee).
^ Cost Times a Factor: Direct Salary Cost times a factor of
plus reimbursable expenses.
® Standard Hourly Billing Rates: Hourly rates plus reimbursable expenses.
The Not to Exceed Limit for this Work Order is: Two Hundred Forty-Six Thousand One Hundred ($246 100)
A Construction Cost Limit of is agreed upon between OWNER and ENGINEER for this Project.
ENGINEER:
SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.
OWNER:
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Signed:
Its:
Dated:
Signed:
James D. Prosser
Its: City Manager
Dated:
<Garage>SEHconag
i~ ' ~
3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 612 490-2000 800 325-2055
ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION
August 29, 1997 RE: City of Richfield
Maintenance Facility
SEH No. A-RICHF9704.00
Mr. Mick Eastling
Public Works Director, City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN
55423-2599
Dear Mike:
Short Elliott Hendrickson respectfully submits the following summary of work for the
Professional Services required to complete the Design Development, Construction
Documentation, Bidding and Construction Services for you new Maintenance Facility.
Based on our recent discussion with you on Wednesday August 27, 1997, we have. developed a
scope of work for the professional services required. Attached as Exhibit "A", is a more detailed
itemization of the work and schedule to be provided the City of Richfield. We have identified
and associated fees in accordance with the current "Agreement Between the City of Richfield and
Short Elliott. Hendrickson Inc. For Professional Services." Referencing that Agreement, our
scope of work can be summarized as follows:
2.3 "C" Phase -Design Development (Preliminary Design Phase):
Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents and any adjustments authorized by the
Owner in the program, schedule or construction budget, the Architect shall prepare, for approval
by the Owner, Design Development Documents consisting of drawings and other documents to
fix and describe the size and character of the Project as to architectural, structural, mechanical
and electrical systems, materials and such other elements as may be appropriate. The Architect
shall advise the Owner of any adjustments to the preliminary estimate of Construction Cost.
Work outlined under the heading 31 -DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, in Exhibit "A", attached with
this letter, will be preformed on a Standard Hourly Billing Rate plus reimbursable. The not-to
exceed-limit for this work is: $67,300
2.4 "D" Phase -Construction Documents (Final Design Phase ):
Based on the approved Design Development Documents and any further adjustments in the scope
or quality of the Project or in the construction budget authorized by the Owner, the Architect
shall prepare, for approval by the Owner, Construction Documents consisting of Drawings and
Specification setting forth in detail the requirements for the construction of the Project. The
Architect will advise the Owner of any adjustments to previous preliminary estimates of
SHORT ELLIOTT
HENDRICKSON INC. MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST. CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI .MADISON, WI LAKE COUNTY, IN
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Mr. Mick Eastling ,,,.
August 29, 1997 l~"'`~
Page 2
Construction Cost indicated by changes in requirements or general market conditions.
Work outlined under the heading 51 -Construction Documents in Exhibit "A", attached with this
letter, will be preformed on a Standard Hourly Billing Rate plus reimbursable's. The not-to
exceed-limit for this work is: $105,800.
2.5 "E" Phase -Bidding or Negotiating Phase:
The Architect, following the Owner's approval of the Construction Documents and the latest
preliminary estimate of Construction Cost, shall assist the Owner in obtaining multiple bids and
assist in awarding and preparing contracts for construction.
Work outlined under the heading 54 -Bidding & Negotiation in Exhibit "A", attached with this
letter, will be preformed on a Standard Hourly Billing Rate plus reimbursable's. The not-to
exceed-limit for this work is: $6,000.
2.6 "E" Phase -Construction Phase:
The Architect will preform the standard services as described in this phase based on the AIA
Owner Architect Agreement B 141. The Master Agreement shall. be amended to use the AIA
Document to allow for a better representation of work to be provided for buildings in lieu of civil
engineering projects for this phase of the work.
An option to add additional construction management services to this phase of the project to
allow for the partnering of a general contractor will be determined following the Design
Development Phase of this project. A variation of typical construction management services will
be used to add these services.
Work outlined under the heading 62 -Construction Administration in Exhibit "A", attached with
this letter, will be preformed on a Standard Hourly Billing Rate plus reimbursable's. The not-to
exceed-limit for this work is: $67,000
Sincerely,
Nancy Schultz, AIA
Project Manager
WP Initials
Enclosure
• R:41RCH1PROJEGTS~RICHFAGREE.WPD
Q
_m
W
Q
U
rV
r
V
W
Z
Z
W
H
Z o
Q a
0 n
J LL
= V as
V ~ O
~ Q C~!
ci
~Z Z
V V
0 ~ ~
aao
!l.
R
'~
O t0 {O
` (O
N ~O
N (O
N tC
N !O
N (O
N t0
N (O
N t0
N (O
N <O
N 1~
N O
r
L
p ~
~ O
O W
O OD
O aD
O OD
O EO
O O
O OD
O 00
O O
O OD
O 00
O OD
O ~
O ~
O
G ~ A
W A
01 ~
W ~
of ~
W ~
O A
M A
W ~
~ ~
p1 ~
W A
W ti
~ ~ ~
LL O
N (~
Qs n
W
O
N
'~ N
~ N
` N
`
_
N ~~pp
N m
N m
N O
N tp
N O
N O
'N O
~N O
N N
~ G
~
~. O aD
O a0
O
n CD
O- OD
O W
O a0
O OD
O OD
O CO
O CO
O CD
O 00
O aD
O O
C O
~ ~ ^ n A ~ ~ ~ ti ^ A A ~ n _ ~
ti Of Of O 01 O O p1 O 01 O O M O ~ ~
N ~ ~ ~
S. Z
O Z
O t
O Z
O t
O .~
O t
O t
O t
O t
O- t
O L
O .~
O t
~ .~
~ ~
= M O
m
d
U
_
({{ Ojj ~
~
V V
w
V
0 ~
m
O =
-
V
m _
.^ ~
~
N p
Q. ~
~
~
~ OD
C
~ C ~ C
•~ c c Q U ~ m m m
'o m
~
3
a
~
o
o
m
° L
=
a
F-
d c = W
m O 3 10 m ~ c ~ E Z z v ~ F
-
3 ~= Z ~ w ~ '~ v ~ ~ z Q a
c ~ ~ O
Z
z
~ ~- W
U
W
4 _
m
a
~
~
W
-~
~
W ~"'
V _
~
O ~
p 3
m
iii C `~
N ~
~ Z
w ~ ~ m ~ ~ ` ~ m
~ S a y
H s ~
'~
° w
~ ~- a r c a = v m' 2 a ~ ~
~ o
~
O ~
O ~ h ~ ~ V ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ p O O
~ O a ~ ti Q o (A ~ U v c 'a~i U ~ O
O O ~ v u
1 O p c a ~ ~ ~ o m S O
O ti Cf N C O t ~ W ~ € N O V ti
° V v a a ~ ~ m ~°-. a ~ a ~ m ~ _
n
E _ ~ N N ~
m V N
Y M
O
H O
O r N M ~ ~ [f t G / ~ oD Of O
r r
r N
r M
r tT
r ~!
r t0
r P
r OD
e-. Ol
r O
N r
N N
N
a
v
m
~a
3
U
C
O
C
N
C
O
.~
U
.G
d
V
3
a
N
C
l0
3
N
C
O
V
C
O
a
.~
m
C
O
N
p
,~
7
U
N
.~
.~
a
N
_T
L
~'
Q
H
m
X
W
V
1~
°v
U
LL
W
Z
Z
W
_Z
Q
J
W
Ll.
0
T
0
ti
LL
V~
~ O
Q ~
(Z Z
it ~+
V V
1 1 ~
0
aao
ao
o
N OD
c
O
N C W
C y
~ ~ ~
a ~ a ~
W ~ m
O
lh y
C
y ~
~
yN m
~ 3 W I
N
S ~ ~
N t N t
O
CD O O
~. F- N ~"_
~ C ~ C
W
0 p W
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
S
m tF
~ U L ~ ' V L
l ~ I
~ O N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
w r .O O C .N.. ~ ~
L ~ X C ~ t ~ X
m W m
N W m ~ Y N
{!~ ~O b ~O ~O ~ O ~ b ~ N N N N N N N O O O
O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N r
L
p ~
0 Cf ~ ~ ~
O ~ ~
O ~
O ~
O ~ ~`
O ~
O O ~
O ~
O ~
O ~ ~
O O O
~
I
c ~ O
i O
n O
~ ~ O
n ~ ~ n O
n ~ n O
n ~ n n O
n ~ ~ n
Li. ~ O O T O) Of O O O 01 r, ~ Q) W ~ Cl O ~ O O
o~ es as
IA 1A 1n to u) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O O O ~ ~' M n
O
~ o
rn 0
rn 0
m 0
rn 0
rn 0
m 0
rn 0
rn 0 ~
'~ ~ ~-
m ~ ~ O o N
~ o
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
a rn
o
c m
o
0 m
0 rn
0 rn
0 rn
0
0 0
n n n n n n ~ n n ~ n n n n n n ~ n r~
~
ti rn rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn ti rn rn rn rn rn m ~., rn m
~ O Os 01
O O O O O O O O O O N ~ ~ O O O ~ ~
~ ~
_ r N
.~ O 8
O
N m ~
,~
C
y
R
~ ~
O
Q. ~ O y p, fA cJ J
~ E i
~
O 7 O 0
' c
~ ~ C T Q: a
3
y ~ U) y V l6 (Q
C y 0 ~ ~
t
l6 ,
~ y
. !/~
C ~ m o U `o i° o ~ ojs `m €
Q
m
> v °- c N ~ ~ ° . y o lA
~
~ R Q ~ ~ ~ o` ® m
V ~ o m
7 y
m y m y O In
a ~
m OD
C
~ = '
Q v
c C O W C ~ t/ C 'a „
y ~ ~°
m o U m O c m o m y c O
d ~ E ~ l6 y i° 16 ° ~ y ~ m
c O a>
}
G7 N Q U = _ V L t0 p` m ~ O m O N m m ~ ~
d ~ c c ~ a ° ~ m ,
o ~ ~ Q ~ ~ O in ~ m
~• V X ~ C
a c m
~ ~ v ~ rn o~
• Y ~ W V ~ a = Q o V
V ~N m T y m m ~ ` E O ~
Q
~ ~ ~ O ~ O
\ ~ O
D
N ~ > c
W o
> D
U ~
O s
U Y W ~
~ C U ~
~ ~
~ ~
a
R m
` L ~
N
v N ~ o N 1 ~ m .y ~ ~ w O $ o '~ ~ ,~
O N E m Yal m m ~ ~ O O• y y y y
v O y O
'
O E ~ ~ ~
° r s y ~
c O o
m O C
t o a v v >. m -a
, et m> m m m m ~ :a ~
ti ~ ~ o ui ~ o m m` W ~ ~ a a a a d ~ ~
=
o
~
m p
,
3
~
c
o
0
0
0
3
~
a a
o
o o ~ = a W m = m =
~ y
m m ~ m
' O m
' m m m m O m
'
~ m
~ ~ ~ ~!' 2 D U ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D R ~ D
+ t
+
~ M c+1 M M t~7 ~ t+~ M co c
~ M c~ cn c+> ch cn c
~ M c+~ r~
R
Z
Y
H
o M a ~ m n eo ~ o .- a M a
' h ~o
+ n eo as g ~ a ~ ~
N N N N N N N M M M M {
9 N l
f M M M
0
a
~o
a
m
3
V
C
O
C
y
c
0
.~
V
7
4
V
.n
a
y
io
3
y
C
U
C
0
E
a
3
v
m'
c
0
v
c
3
E
E
O
U
O
N
R
Q
y
T
t
y
0)
C
.~
m
v
W
Q
H
m
2
W
V
V
LL
W
Z
Z
LW
r
Z c
Q O
~ ~
O
~ ~
LJ.
V O
~ ~ O
~ Q c~
ZZ
~ ~
V V
aa`o
N
c
Q N
~ O
O ~
3 O
to N
N W
R
p O
O
~ t
~
7 ~
C
m
v m
c
' W ~
O ~
o rn ao O c~ ~
~
O
'a
O C
O
~ O)
C
t
~0 L ~ ~ V R O L
(q (n Y !n W Cfl fn
O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O N ~ ~
_ r _
s o o 'o 'o o N G o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 o O
a
c
~
~
~
ti
~
i
-:
i
~
n
i
n
n
~
m
m
LL O O O) rn O n ti of of rn rn m m rn rn r a
i
w as ~
O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O
- M O
- O
r O
r
O N
O '-
O •-
O •-
O r
~
O !~
~
O ~
O
r ~
O
.- ~
O
r ~
O
.- ~
O
r r
O
r r
O
r .
O
r ~
Q .
O O O
a r
ti O
i r
~ r
~ r
~ ~ ~ t. n i ~: n n ~ `n ~ e i n
rn rn rn rn m M ti rn rn rn rn rn m rn rn ti rn rn rn
(A 07 O~ Os
S S S S .C S L •c t t S L t L S ,O t .L L
O ~ O. O O .
Y~ O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~
r 117 O
_ ~ N
r
U ~ ~ ~
m
°c° ti w N
-~ y N ~ ~
,
a ~ ~ ,~ +~•
= ~
y
C W N ~
g ~ W ~
~ N O
U p J O
>, ~ V ~ d
m ~ ~ p ~ ~ M
C ~"~ 0 R J C y H
m .N..
3 _
~ Z
~ O N O
~ E = O
~ o
a =
~ ~
~ o
~ o
~ ~ a a
~
•O'' J m ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 m ~ H y V
~
16
~ otS O U C R ~ m ~ ~ ;_o o
~ c O o o ~ L Q ~ ~ C m o
c aco D U c v ~ ~ eo N ~ ~ ~ h
o in ~ o !~ O
U o ~ c
m o +~ ~ u m
c p ~ Q m _ O O' ~ C J N ~ O d
W ~ 0 ~ N " ' ~ ~ C 0
N Q ~ U N m V . l6
N o „
~ ~ ' v ~ a R R 1Q 2 m V ~ ~ ~
•
w a
~
_
~
V
`o
o
w
~
~
o
c
.a
e
D
v
N L ~ ~ N > O C t Q ~ ~"
H r
~,
Z ~ O L ~" V 7
N
m W
w
"-
~ ~ ~ C ~ Y ~ 3 U Y
o ~° i
,o ~ ~ o o a
v
W
W
O
m
E
~
c 0
m
m
v m
c
p c c
c
O
N
~ ~..-
.. ~ tt! '
O V ' U ~ ° Z ~ '~ ~ a
o H o d ~ p - ~ a.
o U ~ ~ ti Q d ~ c ~ c ~ O o m
N t
m m
~ 3 ~ o Q a
° ~ c ~ ~ U U C
~ ~ r
l6 ' O
ti 2 m o S ~ -
O O t6 w o o e
C
O .~
~ O
O 'O
d ~
O
O~ U >
C1 >
O V
O
O >
O
O
.d
O (~
~
U O U ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ (A D O O D ~ ~
M
f7
M
M =
~"~ U
~
1(~ ~
N
b ~
~ ~
~O ~
t0 t
~O s
~ s
~O r
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
4"J
A
Z ~
r
Y ~
O
H
p ~ A e1 O r N rf ~ u'1 {e 1~ ro of O ~ N M ~! ~ {O
A
a
~~
Q
F
m
W
.Q
M~
``W
f~
U
U
LaL
W
Z
Z
W
H
Z ~
Q O
~~
J ~
W = No
U_ ~ ~
~ Q ~
e~0 C
Z Z
V V
r'd
a`ao
0
M
c
E
v
0
r ~
m N
c
~ ~ £
O N Q
("~
~
C
d0
~ W ~
N O
~ O D
r (O
y ~ O C C
a
= C O
W F
- m ^
C O
O L ~ ~ O ~ ~ m
O ~ O fN O ~ N ~'
O
O
C .N-.
3 ~
~ 'D
O O C
"O ~ L ~
X .y O
~ L C L O C
O C
w N V N O L R O W O L
(n Y In W m N Y f/1 W m ~ (n
~ O O ~ O ~ ~ M- N N O O
N ~ N N O O a O a s ° a a a a ~
Z O ~ ~ a a N N
r ~ . ~ p
~
is
t
n
ao
0
c
LL ~
O> ti ~
W ~
w ~
w ti
~ ti
rn ~
w ~
m ~
m n
rn .
O m o> ~
rn a> rn r
~ ~
O (~ r ~ O r O O ~ r O r ~ W N N 0 `
~ ~ ~ ~ a a a a ~ a a a a N
O
.- `
r ~ ~ a
~ ~ .- N
.- r- .- r- N .- .- ~ ~ o ~
~ n ~ i ~ n ~ i ~ n n i ~ ~ n ~ n ao ao
M (~. O O M M 01 01 O 01 Of ~ O M O M 41 Of
~ Q1 ~
L C t .L t t .= L L L L .C' L L L t t
n .
C N O
O a0 ~O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O
~
M
~
N ~
r
N m
Y V
d
L
u
3 O
~
N
•5 ~ Q N
= m
O Q~ C •
R ~ ~ o ~ `~
, a ~ ~ z
o- ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ m o
H ~ ~,
b ~
Q 7 Q
p N = C N
O ~ °- c a a ~ o O D y
~ R ~,
,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q
a W o Z
~
~
~ a m o °
~' 3 0 ° ¢ Z ~
' D
~
• R ~ - g o a w w ~ s ~, u ¢
f 1 ~ _ ~F -~ Q ~ ° v ,~y,. III N
° ° r O
C D ~ ~ W {O{~ ~ ® ~ O Z V V N
~ ¢
~ w w
0 ~-. W Z V ~ Z U
D 3 m r
R Q
~
0 o a. ~j c ~ c o = ~ ~
~
m m ® 3 3 ° c e ~ o = m c ° ~
p a n a d m y LL ~ ~ o an U ~ w V
c o R °
Qs U U U ~ ~ ~ ~
`m
E
m e}
O a
o ~
~ -a
m o.
~ o
o
_
V °
~ c c = ~ ~ v ~
~ 3 A
rn a
i rn = o H v
~ rn rn rn LL LL ~ a h ¢ _ ¢ a ¢ m ¢
~ ~ ~ n ~ u ~
£ ~ ~ ~ ~ > '
~a
Z ~ ~
Y
H
p t~ a0 Of O ~ N M ~ Y"f t0 P ap Of O ~ N rf ~ ief t0 t~ ao
v
o,
m
a
v
m
.II
7-
U
C
O
c
N
C
O
iC
U
L
7
a
u
n
3
a
N
lp
N
G
V
c
E
a
.~
O'
m
C
0
U
C
7
O
v
N
R
d
a
>.
L
a
m
W
U
D
hm
J_
V
Q
LL
W
Z
Q
W
Z ~
Q O
J Os
LL
W = NC
= V as
V~o
~ Q ~
d
eo O
Z Z
v v
0 0 ~
aao
N N (O (O O M ~ ~ N ~ ~ N M O
~ ' ~ ' N N O ~ N O O
b o o ~ o ~ s o 0 0 s
~
~ ~ ,
0 ~
0 ~,
0
~
o
~
~
o
o ~ W ~ 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
LL ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N N CD (D ~ O t0 O ~ ~ •- OO to N O m N O O M O f~
O O O O ~ ~
~ ~
a r'
rn O N
~ N N O ~"
u~ `
~ N
v~ O
m O ~ N (~ O
c~
o cn
o
~ u>
0 co
0
0 o
0
0 m
0
0
~
~ ~o
0
0
'
0
0
0 ~ ~ ~ o a
~ ao ~ ao ao ao ao ao oo w ao ao co ao ao a
o ao m ao w ao w ao a~
+p m rn rn rn rn W rn rn rn ~ rn rn m m m rn rn rn m rn rn m
L L L L L t L L L t t L L
~ L L t L t L t L L
O O N M (U (O (9 ~ ~ h N. b O ~ ~ N ~ to ~ ~ M
N
x
c c c c c
c
0 0 0 0 0 0
c
~ U U U U U U U
C
~
N ~ C L C C '
C L
~ o m R ~a R m m
~ c ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
U
m
m
m
m
m
m
a c
~
m
~
<o
ao
m O.
~-
~
gy
~ m
~ m
~ m
~ m
~ m
~
~ _
N w
N w
N ~
N M
N
~N M
N
41
N _
N
_
~N _
N
{
p
N N W !0 l6 l0 ... ~ 7 > > > > ~ ~ ~ ~ >
m o E E E E E E ~ m m m m m m m m m m m
` m
LL LL ii iL ti ii iL iL ~i ii u
. ia.
d a ~ ~ t'n ~ c'n N ~ $ ~ $ $ S $ S o $ o o $
~ ~ d
o 0 0 o g o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
p^j
n
~
n
~
~
~
~
N
~ ~
S ~
2
2
S
=
S
2
S
=
=
2 ~
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ` ~°. U U U U U U U U U U U
U U U U U U U U o
o = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
°' m N m ~ m N m N m ~
c
O c
O c
O
Z
G O O ~ N M ~ Y9 !C I~ CO O O O O O O O O O O O r
CO W Of Cf Of 01 Of 01 W Of O> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r. ~ r r
A
a
v
0
3
v
c
0
c
N
C
O
A
u
a
3
d
U
L
3
a
N
C
_W
7
N
C
C
a
7
O
0
R
v
c
E
E
0
v
m
N
.~
~.
L
01
N
O
C
~°
0
,o,
Q
M~
W
x
W
Q
U
M~
W
V
~_
~..~
U
Q
W
W
U
Z
Q
Z
W
F-
Z o
CQ o
L ~
0
J ~
LL
W = o
U_ ~
~ Q ~
d
t0 O
ZZ
~ ~
V V
~^ ~^ ~
0
aao
~I
I
R
w
er 00 ~ OD ~ OD b N O O M O n ch O n ~ aD
~ N N O ~ ~ -N O O ~ N N O '' N N O ~ ~ N O O
Z h n n a~D a'0 ~ ao O T ~ O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ N N
W O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~- ~
1 ~
\ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
CQ m `N CO m W CD CO OD
W CD
d1 aD
O ~
W GD
O OD
O l0
O CD
W ID
O EO
O ~
O ~
O m
O OD
O
tL d1 O O O 01 O O O
r~ 00 ~ CD tt) r fD In N 63 (U CQ O n co O n et ~ O
~ N N ~ ` N O O ~ N N O ~ N N O ` N O O
1~ n n a0 t0 aD aD ~ W ~ 01 ~ O O O O r' ~ ~ ~ N N
~ O O O O O O O O O O O O •' ~ ~ r' ~" ~ ~" ~ ~ ~
~ O O O ~ W ~ ~ O O ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o~ rn m rn rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn m m rn rn rn m rn rn
L t L L L L L L L L L L L L t L L L L L L t
~ n ~ V' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ b ~ O
- ~ u~ ~ ~n
yj ~ ~ ~- r- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e
x
(q at ~ (O n ap O O N M ~ ~ t0 n ao 01 O ~- N cn
r r r r r ~ N N N N N N N N N N f'0 @7 f7 f7
N X41 N ~N ~N N N N ~N N ~N ~N N ~N fD ~N N N N N N N
v v v v -o v v v v v ~ v v v ~ v v v v -o -a v
m m m m m m m m m ~ d m m m m m m ~ m m m d
lL LL IL lL lL I1. lL lL lL L1. lL IJ.. lL tL lL IJ.. l1 lL lL LL ~ lL lL
O O O O O O O O O O
8 O O O O O O O O
S
o $ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn m rn W rn rn rn m rn rn rn rn
2 S 2 _ = 2 S 2 S S S 2 2 = S 2 2 S 2 2 2 =
U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U
~ ~
m
R
2
Y
H
r r ~ r r r r r N N N N N N N N N M M N
C a
- r N e
+f
a
m
U
C
O
C
C
O
.~
V
7
a
U_
.~
7
a
N
C
f0
3
N
C
O
U
CC
G
.~
m
C
O
m
U
._
7
V
d
N
.~
~U
m
N
T
L
M
Q
m
W
Q
U
D
V
J
V
Q
LL
W
V
Z
Z
W
Zc
Q O
J Q7
LL
W 2 0
LL V ~
V ~ o
~a~
Z
w ~
.O Q ~
L L ~
aao
tq
` N
N O
N t0
O N
~ O
` N
N N
N C7.
O d'
O
W ~ ~ ~ O O O O O O O
_
LL ~ ~ W ~ ~ OOi m W ~ N
r N N O ~ ~ N N O
~ ~ a ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~ W W ~ ~ ~ O N
N
, ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ ~ O O
~- er ~ et N N
x
0
N
_C
Q
O
a
N
Z
-
O
O
' _
N
c
c m
a >
o
0 0 ~
~ CJ
Cg ~0 ~
c
ip c
m O
C
~ N
7
O
v~
w co
~ n
~ ao
w rn
w o
w .n ~ ~ 0
~ ~ U
N
> N
> N
> N
> N
> (~
> .N ~ O
V
v
d
v
m
'v
m
v
m
~
m
-v
m
>
-a
rn
=
~
m Q
a
ii ii ii ii u. ii m CJ o y
°
$ S ii ~ a a
$
~'
~ o
~ 0
~ o
~
~ o
o a
0 o
0 d
0
~ ~ ~ $
U U U U U U S = _ ~
U
~ ~ Q
1 ~
m
R ~ ~ ~ ~
Z
Y
0 M M C~9 C~9 Cn9 M M ~ ~7
R
a
id-d~-
c
0
v
N
N
O
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 240
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Authorize an expenditure not to exceed $100,000 from the storm water utility fund to
assist in creating a regional retention pond to relieve flooding at Fountainhead
Apartments in conjunction with ponding for Galyan's Trading Co.
Background:..
The Fountainhead Apartments at 76th Street and Knox Avenue have for years had a
flooding problem. Every time there is a significant. rainfall or a series of rainfalls the
Fountainhead management rents pumps to pump water from their holding pond to an
existing storm sewer in Knox Avenue. During recent events Richfield's Public Works
Department has assisted by providing additional pumps.
When Galyan's Trading Co. acquired the site formerly occupied by the Naegele Sign
Co. a condition was placed on that development requiring that Galyan's provide on site
storm water management for its storm water runoff.
Pursuant to Council's general direction to the Public Works Department to be proactive
and involved in solving storm water problems within the City as redevelopment occurs,
staff has been working with the owners of Fountainhead and the developers of Galyan's
to provide a regional storm water pond and lift station. The lift station is necessary
because the elevation at which buildings in this area flood is lower than available storm
sewer receiving points.
Staff has used City consultants to determine the necessary ponding storage and lift
station capacity. If this request is granted, Galyan's will pay for their ponding and lift
station needs as well as for any excess depth required in the pond and any amenities
around the pond.
The Fountainhead Apartments have been paying storm water utility fees for
management of their runoff even though they have pumped their own stormwater into
Richfield's system or the Minnesota Department of Transportation freeway system.
Fountainhead is paying about $4,200 per year for utility fees. Galyan's will pay about
$7,200 per year. As part of the development plan, the stormwater utility will pay to have
Galyan's pond enlarged sufficiently to provide the same level of protection to
Fountainhead. Under the agreement the City agrees to take over long term
maintenance of the lift station similar to other lift stations within the storm water and
sanitary sewer utility systems.
The total amount of financial involvement required of the storm water utility fund
. including engineering, staff time, lift station construction and supplemental excavation
will be less than $100,000.
R-
Recommended Motion:
Authorize an expenditure not to exceed $100,000 for the City's share of providing 100
year storm sewer protection to both Galyan's Trading Co. and The Fountainhead
Apartments.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The area in question has suffered for years without adequate storm sewer
availability.
2. Despite the lack of storm sewer protection the Fountainhead Apartments have
been paying storm sewer utility fees.
3. By working with the owners of the adjacent properties the City can provide 100
year storm sewer protection to one of the last areas in the City to be without
adequate protection.
4. Assisting in this storm sewer project is consistent with City policy and previous
Council direction
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could direct staff to not assist the owners of Galyan's and Fountainhead with
the storm water protection project.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests that Council consider this item at its regular meeting of September 8,
1997.
Respectful) submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
8
•
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 239
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
First reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements
from the Special Revenue Fund.
Background:
City Charter Section 7.12, Subd. 2 requires that Special Revenue Funds used for
capital improvements must be authorized by ordinance
At the December 9, 1996 City Council meeting, the City Council authorized $525,000 of
Special Revenue Funds for the improvements to several City parks in 1997. In
addition, the 1997 Capital Improvement Budget provides for expenditure for all types of
funds contained in the budget document including county funds, municipal state aid,
user fees, federal grants and state grants, however, authorization by ordinance is not
required for these expenditures.
While the total 1997 Capital Improvements Budget (CIB) includes total budgeted
expenditures of $9,506,436"the portion of CIB concerning proposed funding from the
Special Revenue fund is $500,000 as shown below:
Sheridan Park
Wood Lake Bridges/Docks
Ice Arena Lockerrooms
Ice Arena Lockerrooms'
$ 400,000
$ 89,500
$ 10,500
$ 110, 000
A transitory ordinance is necessary to finalize these appropriations pursuant to City
Charter.
This amount is a carryover from the 1996 transitory ordinance. The original ordinance
approved by the City Council stated that this $110,000 was budgeted fora 100 car
parking lot at Veterans Memorial Park. However, the City Council reallocated those
funds to be used for the Ice Arena lockerroom improvement.
Recommended Motion:
Approve first reading of the transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds
from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements and schedule second
reading and public hearing for September 22, 1997.
•
J
Basis of Recommendation:
1. On December 9, 1996, the City Council approved the 1997 Capital Improvement
Budget, which includes an expenditure of $500,000 of Special Revenue Funds for
improvements to several City parks.
2. Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes effective
30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. The ordinance
requirements must be completed so that funding for the capital projects can be
transferred on a timely basis to pay for authorized 1997 Capital Projects.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could postpone the first reading of the transitory ordinance to a
future City Council meeting.
2. The City Council could decide to authorize none or only a portion of the
expenditures identified from special revenue in the CIB.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
In order to proceed with the transfer of Special Revenue Funds on a timely basis, first
reading approval of this transitory ordinance would be desirable on September 8, 1997
so that the public hearing and second reading could take place on September 22, 1997.
Respec Ily submitted,
Ja .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
•
.BILL NO.
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM
THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to
expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements
listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general
obligation bonds.
Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such
improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under
Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows:
Sheridan Park $ 400,000
Wood Lake Bridges/Docks $ 89,500
Ice Arena Lockerrooms $ 10,500
Ice Arena Lockerrooms' $ 110,000
'This amount is a carryover from the 1996 transitory ordinance. The original ordinance
approved by the City Council stated that this $110,000 was budgeted fora 100 car
parking lot. at Veterans Memorial Park. However, the City Council reallocated those
funds to be used for the Ice Arena lockerroom improvement.
Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such
contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of September, 1997.
~-a
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
7
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 23s
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Consideration of 1997 Revised/1998 Proposed budget resolutions adopting 1998
preliminary property tax levy, Truth in Taxation hearing dates and canceling 1998 ad
valorem levy for current special assessment bonds.
Background:
As required by the Truth in Taxation legislation (MS 275.065) each "taxing authority"
must certify its proposed property tax levy for payable year 1997 to the County Auditor
on or before September 15, 1997. "Taxing authority" includes all counties, all school
districts, all cities regardless of population, all towns and all special taxing districts. No
local units of government are exempted from this requirement.
In addition, each "taxing authority" must certify to their County Auditor the da#es that
have been selected for the Truth in Taxation hearings by September 15, 1997. The
date for this hearing must not conflict with the hearing dates of the county or of the
school district in which the "taxing authority" is located. This Truth in Taxation public
hearing must be held between November 29 and December 20, 1996.
Before the City Council takes action on these issues, a presentation and discussion of
the 1996 Revised/1997 Proposed budget and 1998 preliminary property tax levy occurs
at a Special City Council meeting(s). To that end, two special, televised City Council
meetings were held, pursuant to the City Charter, for this purpose. City staff presented
the budget and proposed tax levy to the City Council in a round table format to facilitate
discussion. This is similar to the budget presentation format that has been used in the
past.
In addition to the 1997 Revised/1998 Proposed budget and preliminary property tax
levy, City staff is also recommending dates for this year's Truth in Taxation public
hearings. It is recommended that this year's hearings be set for 7 p.m. Wednesday,
December 3, 1997 with a continuation date of 7 p.m. Wednesday, December 10, 1997.
As Council Members are aware, at these public hearings, the tax levy may be reduced
from the preliminary tax levy, but not increased.
All official action concerning the preliminary tax levy and setting dates for the Truth in
Taxation hearings must be concluded before September 15, 1997.
In addition to the proposed tax levy and Truth in Taxation public hearing dates, the
County requests that the series of resolutions which cancel a portion of the ad valorem
tax levy for current special assessment bonds be adopted with the preliminary levy
instead of with the final levy at the end of the Truth in Taxation hearings. This assists
the County in updating its records in a more timely manner.
n-i
The City is canceling all of the 1998 ~d valorem tax levies for current special
assessment bonds; and~herefore has no 1998 tax levy for special assessment debt.
Recommended Motion:
Receive the 1997 Revised/1998 Proposed budget and adopt the resolution establishing
the 1998 preliminary property tax levy and proposed dates for the Truth in Taxation
hearings and resolutions contained in the budget canceling special assessment levies.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City Charter establishes September 1, 1997 as the last day for City staff to
present a 1997 Revised/1998 Proposed budget to the City Council. While the Truth
in Taxation statute has overridden the Charter process for budget adoption, City
staff still follows the Charter provisions which are not in conflict with the Truth in
Taxation statute.
2. Truth in Taxation timelines establish the process that must be followed to adopt a
preliminary property tax levy. September 15 is the deadline for cities to submit a
1997 proposed property tax levy and Truth in Taxation hearing dates to the County
Auditor.
3. The August 27 and September 3 Special Council meetings provided an informal
• setting to discuss the proposed budget and tax levy prior to the deadline for official
City Council action.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could adopt either a greater or lesser 1998 preliminary property tax
levy, 1997 Revised/1998 Proposed budget or select other allowable Truth in
Taxation hearing dates.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The September 8, 1997 City Council meeting is the last regular City Council meeting at
which the 1998 proposed property tax levy and dates for the Truth in Taxation hearings
may be adapted before the September 15, 1997 deadline.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
`~ a-
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED BUDGET AND TAX LEVY
FOR THE YEAR 1998
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Truth in Taxation law provides for a proposed tax
levy to be certified to the County Auditor by September 15, 1997, and then recertified
before December 31, 1997.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The proposed budget for the City of Richfield for the year 1998 is hereby
approved and adopted with appropriations for each of the departments to be
as follows:
General Fund
Legislative/Executive
Administrative Services
Public Safety
Community Development
Public Works
Recreation Services
Transfers
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
$ 666,960
949,040
7,24,870
235,440
3,075,230
1, 390,270
230,000
$14,071,810
2. The estimated gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources,
including general ad valorem tax levies as hereinafter set forth for the year
1998 which are more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the
1998 budget, are hereby found and determined to be as follows:
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $14,071,810
3. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a
direct ad valorem tax in the year 1997, payable in 1998 for the following
purposes and in the following amounts:
PURPOSE
GENERAL FUND
AMOUNT
$27, 929, 927
~!~ 'Provision has ben
• e made in the General Fund for the payment of the City s
contributory share to Public Employees' Retirement Association. All
authorized levies for debt service will be canceled as there are sufficient
funds available to pay 1997 principal and interest. See separate resolutions.
for the cancellation of the tax levies for debt service.
` General Fund Levy included all fiscal disparities distribution and HACA
amounts.
4. The proposed budget for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of
Richfield for the year 1998 is hereby ratified and approved. There is hereby
levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax
in the year 1997, payable in 19.98 for the following purposes:
PURPOSE AMOUNT
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority $ 179,350
5. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the County Auditor.
6. The Truth in Taxation public hearings shall be set for 7:00 p.m. December 3,
1997 with a continuation hearing at 7:00 p.m. December 10, 1997 if
necessary.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
'1-~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN AD VALOREM TAX
LEVIES ON THE IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1980
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 6310 provided for the sale of $6,100,000
Improvement Bonds of 1980 and provided for taxes to be levied for the payment of
principal and interest thereon; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 6310 certified an ad valorem tax levy for 1998 of
$475,000 for payment of principal and interest on the Improvement Bonds of 1980; and
. WHEREAS, it appears desirable to cancel certain ad valorem tax levies to be
levied for 1998, due to substantial prepayment in previous years of special
assessments and the investment return on these funds; and
WHEREAS, there are presently funds available in the Improvement Bonds of
1980 Fund to pay current principal and interest on such bonds-, and
WHEREAS, the ad valorem tax levy requirement includes a 5 percent excess
provision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
That the amount levied in 1997, collectible in 1998 on Resolution No. 6310 in the
amount of $475,000 is hereby canceled.
2. That a copy of this resolution shall be sent to the Hennepin County Auditor.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
•
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~-S
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CANCELLATION OF CERTAIN AD VALOREM TAX
LEVIES ON IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1983
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 6842 provided for the sale of $825,000 General
Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1983 and provided for taxes to be levied for the
payment of principal and interest thereon; and
WHEREAS, it appears desirable to cancel certain ad valorem tax levies to be
levied for 1997, due to funds on hand from tax increments and the investment earnings
thereon exceed the amount necessary to pay principal and interest on such bonds; and
WHEREAS, the ad valorem tax levy requirement includes a 5 percent excess
provision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota as follows:
That the amount levied in 1997, collectible in 1998, on Resolution No. 6842 in the
amount of $25,713 is hereby canceled.
2. That a copy of this resolution shall be sent to the Hennepin County Auditor.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
~N
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 237
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Application for a community celebration event license with a request for a fee waiver for
Richfield Cattails Days events scheduled to take place on September 20 and 21, 1997.
Background:
This year, Richfield Visions, Inc., has applied for a celebration event license and
requests that the fee be waived for the activities that take place in Veterans Memorial
Park on September 20 and 21, 1997.
The committee has contacted food sanitarians from the City of Bloomington to ensure
that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington
sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome food handling.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends the approval of a community celebration event license with a fee
waiver to Richfield Visions, Inc. for the Richfield Cattail Days to be held on September
20 and 21, 1997.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City application
process and meets requirements for the fee to be waived.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide not to grant the license. This would result in the
applicant not being able to conduct activities, especially those concerning food
preparation, on September 20 and 21, 1997.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Consideration of the request for the issuance of a community celebration event license
with a request for a fee waiver for Richfield Cattails Days events scheduled to take
place on September 20 and 21, 1997 is presented for Council consideration at this
time.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
City Manager
• JDP:cak
~O ~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 236
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Reject all bids for overlaying 64th Street between Portland Avenue and Nicollet
Avenue.
Background:
Over the last two to three years the blacktopped streets in Richfield have begun to
show premature deterioration of the pavement surface. The type of deterioration noted
is called "stripping" and is caused by loss of bond between gravel particles.
In order to better understand the causes of stripping and to determine possible
preventive measures, the City hired Braun Intertec, one of the area's foremost
authorities on pavement, to examine the problem, sample the existing pavement,
perform laboratory tests and recommend a course of action.
In the meantime 65th Street between Penn Avenue and Xerxes Avenue deteriorated to
such a poor state as to present an "emergency situation." In response, the City
awarded a contract to mill and overlay (remove and replace) the top three inches of the
pavement on that street. Another street which is showing significant stripping is 64th
Street between Portland Avenue and Nicollet Avenue. Staff was concerned that 64th
Street would continue to deteriorate through the summer and that an overlay would be
cost effective this year.
Therefore, staff prepared a project for bidding early this summer. It is now apparent
that the City can effectively patch 64th Street between Portland Avenue and Nicollet
Avenue and postpone the decision to overlay. A copy of the bid minutes/tabulation
from the July 30, 1997 bid opening to mill and overlay that section of street is attached.
The final report from Braun Intertec has now arrived and will be discussed at an
upcoming Study Session. Braun recommends that normal pothole patching of stripped
areas continue until the surface becomes so badly stripped that further patching loses
cost effectiveness. At that time milling off the existing surface and overlaying the street
with a new surface would become the most cost effective maintenance technique.
If resurfacing of Richfield's backtopped streets becomes more widely necessary, the
question of funding must be addressed.
Recommended Motion:
Accept the bid minutes/tabulations and reject all bids for the resurfacing of 64th Street
between Portland Avenue and Nicollet Avenue.
•
~/ ~ y
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The deterioration of the 64th Street surface has not yet reached an "emergency
situation" and normal pothole patching is still effective.
2. ~ Delaying additional resurfacing projects will allow staff time to formulate a policy
on the most cost effective way to mill and overlay deteriorating streets and to
consult with Council as to a funding mechanism.
3. A City wide policy on the application of "mill and overlay" technology and the
funding of these projects will allow fair and equitable cost distribution.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could direct staff to proceed with the resurfacing project.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests that Council consider this item at its regular meeting of September 8,
1997.
Respectf Ily submitted,
James .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
\_~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~ Cyr-~
Bid Opening
July 30, 1997
11:00 a.m.
64th Street Bituminous 2" Mill and Overlay
Nicollet Avenue to Portland Avenue
City Project No. 101-35-600
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff
was called by Thomas P. Ferber, -City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the
meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for 64th Street mill and overlay, as
advertised in the official newspaper on July 16, 1997.
Present: Thomas Ferber, City Glerk
Mike Eastling, Public Works. Director
Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative
•
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
VENDOR Bid Security Total Base Bid
Midwest Asphalt Corporation 5% Bid Bond $ 38,099.95
Eden Prairie
Ashbach Construction Company, 5% Bid Bond $ .31,714.55
St. Paul
Bituminous Roadways Inc.. 5% Bid Bond $ 43,047.60
Minneapolis
Vi-Con, Inc. 5% Bid Bond $ 36,558.40
Northfield
Expert Asphalt 5% Bid Bond $ 59,084.50
Cologne
The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the
September 8, 1997 City Council Meeting.
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~~
Council Letter No. 235
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Approval of an updated 1998-1999 Community Health Services Plan.
Background:
In 1997, the State Legislature passed the Community Health Services Act. The
purpose of the Act is to develop and maintain a system of community health services
under local administration throughout the state. Community health services are those
services provided to protect and improve people's health by preventing illness, disease
and disease disability.
Through this Act, Richfield receives community health services subsidy funds from the
state to support the provision of services such as, home health, disease prevention and
control, health promotion, family health and environmental health.
Since 1977, Richfield has contracted with the City of Bloomington for the provision of
personal public health services. The community health services provided in Richfield
meet the requirements of the State Community Health Services Act and have
continually qualified for a subsidy. This state subsidy funding supports, in part, these
community health service programs through this agreement with Bloomington.
The Community Health Services Act requires that each agency prepares and submits a
four year plan which addresses current and potential public health problems within their
community. Richfield's 1996-1999 Community Health Services plan was approved by
the City Council and submitted to the state in September 1995. However, the state
requires that each agency review their plan in the middle of the plan cycle (two years) to
make any changes or updates. The review of the plan has been completed by the
Richfield Advisory Board of Health and was approved at their July 21, 1997 meeting.
Before the plan is submitted to Hennepin County and finally on to the state, it must
receive the approval of both the Board of Health (City Council) and the Advisory Board
of Health. A copy of the updated plan is attached for Council's review.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the updated 1998-1999 Community Health Services Plan.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. By approving the updated plan, the City will meet the requirements necessary in
order to continue to receive State subsidy money for 1998-1999.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could decide not to approve the updated 1998-1999 Community
Health Services Plan. This would mean that the City of Richfield would not meet
the requirements necessary in order to continue to receive state subsidy money
for the remaining years of the four year plan (1996-1999).
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The updated 1998-1999 Community Health Services Plan is being presented for City
Council approval at this time.
Respec submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City M ger
JDP:cak
~o ~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 234
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Resolution approving Special Law 1997, Chapter 233, Article 1, Section 46 providing an
increase in the benefit multiplier for all Police and Fire PERA members.
Background:
Legislation passed during 1997 allows members of the PERA Police and Fire Fund to
retire with three percent per year benefit multiplier in their retirement annuity formula.
Chapter 233, Article 1, Section 46 grants the higher percentage per year of service to
all Police and Fire members who are active members on July 1, 1997.
Members of the consolidated Police and Fire Relief Associations, such as Richfield's,
do not automatically receive this benefit improvement. Section 46 of Chapter 233
requires the cities to approve use of the new benefit multiplier for their consolidated
members. PERA, in turn, is asking cities with consolidated funds to provide a resolution
directing the use of the new benefit multiplier if the city desires to do so.
If a resolution is adopted by the City, the new benefit multiplier would be available to
members of the local plans at a date after July 1, 1997 as specified by the City's
resolution.
As with other benefit enhancements passed by the legislature, the change to a higher
benefit formula multiplier will increase the City's annual cost. Therefore, cities such as
Richfield must take a look at the benefit multiplier to see what impact it may have on the
consolidated accounts.
While PERA has not provided formal actuarial valuations as of this date, informal
discussions with the actuary for PERA have provided a reasonably certain indication of
what the multiplier enhancement would cost Richfield.
With respect to the consolidated Police fund, there would be no cost to the City. That is
because the consolidated Police fund is in excess of 106 percent fully-funded and the
money needed to pay for the multiplier increase would simply come out of excess
funding.
With respect to the Fire Relief Association, the worst-case scenario would render a cost
of about $6,000 per year for the City. However, because the City consolidated the Fire
Relief Association, there are savings of approximately $150,000 per year associated
with the consolidation. The $6,000 cost would reduce the savings by that amount.
Finally, another issue that must be considered when reviewing this proposal is that if
the City of Richfield did not adopt this resolution, then the consolidated account
members of the Police and Fire Relief Associations would receive benefits inferior to
other members of our Police and Fire Divisions who belong to PERA Police and Fire
~~'~
• Fund. In essence, their pension benefit multiplier would be one-tenth of a percent less
than everyone else. It has been the City of Richfield's desire and commitment to not
make the consolidated funds asecond-class pension program and to keep the benefits
equal to those of PERA.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution approving the Special Law 1997, Chapter 233, Article 1,
Section 46 for the City of Richfield Police and Fire Relief Associations.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Special law concerning benefit enhancements in the form of the benefit multiplier
was passed by the Minnesota Legislature in 1997 and must now be approved by
the City to become effective.
2. The benefit enhancement contained in the special legislation provides an increase
of the multiplier to three percent for Police and Fire retirees. The issues under
consideration here would make consolidated Police and Fire members three
percent also, instead of 2.9 percent.
3. With the consolidation of the Police and Fire Funds, the City of Richfield has
enjoyed substantial savings in the administration of local pension plans and part of
these savings would be used here to ensure that the benefit levels for
• consolidated members are equal with those of other Police and Fire members.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City of Richfield could refuse to approve the resolution. That would leave the
consolidated Police and Fire members one-tenth of a percent behind in the
multiplier than other Police and Fire employees of the City.
rosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
2. The City could postpone the vote on this and wait for the official actuarial results
to come -back from Milliman and Robertson, however, we are quite certain that the
result will not vary significantly from what is being discussed in this Council letter.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on this matter is being suggested for the September 8, 1997 Council meeting in
order to move forward with upgrading the benefit multiplier for consolidated members
as soon as possible.
Respectful submitted,
James . P
(~ E'a2.
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROVING SPECIAL LAW 1997, CHAPTER 233,
ARTICLE 1, SECTION 46, CONCERNING RICHFIELD POLICE AND FIRE RELIEF
ASSOCIATION BENEFIT MULTIPLIER
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield and the Richfield Police and Fire Relief
Associations have sought mutually to complete consolidations with the Public
Employment Retirement Association (PERA) Police and Fire Fund; and
WHEREAS, as part of that consolidation process, the City of Richfield has
striven to ensure that the benefits of consolidated members are substantially the same
as those of other PERA Police and Fire members; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature passed a benefit improvement for Police
and Fire members, effective on July 1, 1997, or as directed by city resolution, that
would increase the benefit multiplier to three percent; and
WHEREAS, Section 46 of Chapter 233 requires cities to individually approve the
use of the new benefit multiplier for their consolidated members; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield must formally approve said
law in order to have it become effective for Richfield's Consolidated Police and Fire
personnel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chapter 233, Article 1, Section
46, granting the higher percentage multiplier for consolidated members of the PERA
Police and Fire Fund is hereby approved.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 3% benefit multiplier be effective on
September 1, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
!~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD; MINNESOTA
~ Council Letter No.233
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Resolution levying a special assessment for nuisance abatement fees.
Background:
There is a resolution on the September 8 1997, City Council agenda certifying a
special assessment for nuisance abatement fees to Hennepin County. This
assessment is for costs incurred by the City in connection with abatement for
nuisances on certain properties in the City which are not properly maintained by their
owners.
For nuisance abatement fees, the fees were billed to the property owners on a
monthly basis. In all cases, the property owners were notified that any unpaid
charges may be assessed against the property for 1997.
The attached resolution provides for these assessments against one property in the
total amount of $5,026.07.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution levying a special assessment for nuisance abatement
fees against the listed property owner in the total amount of $5,026.07.
Basis of Recommendation:
Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one year
assessment for these costs.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not approve the resolution and have the costs absorbed by the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the September 8, 1997 agenda so that this assessment
may be filed with Hennepin County along with the other special assessments.
Respectf Ily submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
~0 e-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 232
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Resolution levying a special assessment. for weed destruction.
Background:
Each year the City of Richfield hires contractors to cut weeds on certain properties in
the City not properly maintained by the owners. If the owner fails to cut the weeds in a
timely manner after notification by the. City, the City undertakes the weed destruction
and bills the property owner for the service: If the cost of the weed destruction. is not
paid by the property owner it may be assessed against the property for a one year
period. The attached resolution provides for this assessment against properties in the
amount of $244.95. In addition, the resolution provides for an 8% penalty.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution levying a special assessment for weed destruction
against the property owners in the amount of $244.95.
.Basis of Recommendation:
1. The properties were not maintained by the owner and the City incurred costs to
• abate the weed nuisance.
2. Minnesota State Statutes provide that the City may levy a special one year
assessment for these costs.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Do not approve the resolution and have the costs absorbed by the City.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the September 8, 1997 agenda so that this assessment
may be filed with Hennepin County along with the other special assessments.
Respectfu ly submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
•
~c-i
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL
ASSESSMENT FOR WEED DESTRUCTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows:
1. The described properties are hereby specially assessed in the amount for the
expense incurred by the City in connection with abatement of a nuisance health
hazard pursuant to provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.101, to wit:
PROPERTY ID ~ ADDITION ADDRESS AMOUNT
34-028-24-22-00 44925 7133 Lyndale Ave. So. $244.95
2. The above listed assessment be spread over a period of one year at the rate of 8%
interest per annum.
3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this
resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch,Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
•
roB
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 231
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a resolution approving special legislation authorizing the "This Old
Apartment" program in Richfield.
Background:
The Minnesota Legislature during its 1997 session approved special legislation for the
City of Richfield (attached). Before the legislation can be implemented, it must be
approved by the City Council
The legislation allows apartment owners to defer property tax increases on value added
improvements that are made in 1997 through 1999. Increases are deferred for ten
years. The legislation makes it possible for the HRA, in partnership with the Richfield
Apartment Managers Association (RAMA) and the Community Apartment Program
(CAP), to provide a more comprehensive package of services that facilitates significant
remodeling.
Recommended Motion:
.Adopt the attached resolution approving the special legislation authorizing the "This Old
Apartment" program in Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The State Legislature recognizes the special housing needs that Richfield has in
• maintaining existing housing.
2. The Richfield HRA will use this program as one effort in a comprehensive strategy
to upgrade the apartment housing stock.
3. State Statute requires that the local governing body approve special legislation
before it may be implemented.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay approval
2. Refuse approval.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A marketing program has been developed to communicate the program to apartment
owners, if approved.
Respec ly submitted,
Jam .Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
•
~a-~
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL LAW
REGARDING EXCLUSION FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES
OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO APARTMENTS
WHEREAS, the 1997 Minnesota Legislature enacted a special law, Laws of
Minnesota 1997, Chapter 231, Article 2, Section 63 (the "Special Law) providing that
the City of Richfield (the "City") may approve the Special Law and thereby exclude for
assessment purposes the increase in Market value resulting from certain improvements
made to "Qualifying property" as defined in the Special Law; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Section 645.021, the Special Law is
not effective without a resolution adopted by majority vote of all members of the City
and by filing with the Secretary of Sate a certificate .required by statute; and
WHEREAS, subdivision 2 of the Special Law specifically provides that the City
must approve the Special Law pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Section 645.021 before
the Special Law is effective; and
WHEREAS, the City deems the Special Law to be in and for the best interests of
the residents of the City.
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield as
follows:
1. The Special Law is approved by the City as required by Minnesota
Statutes, Section 645.021.
•
2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file with the Secretary of State
a certificate stating the essential facts necessary for valid approval, including a copy of
the resolution of approval by the City Council. The form of this certificate shall be
consistent with that prescribed by the Attorney General for this purpose.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 8th day of
September, 1997.
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
HF2163
ection
58 ._
59-61
62
•
May 19, 1997
Page 21
~~
This section is limited to a maximum of five years after the property is placed in
operation, and expires thereafter.. However, if the industrial park is not built by July 1,
2001, this exemption expires. ., _
Washington County HRA. Authorizes Washington County to levy an amount not to
exceed $2 million over a ten year period beginning in taxes payable 1998. The proceeds
of this levy.would be transferred to the Washington County Housing and Redevelopment
Authority to be used to support the activities of the authority within the city of Landfall.
Brooklyn Park EDA. - Provides ~ that if the Brooklyn Park Economic. Development
Authority has loaned money to a condominium association for the construction of
improvements to the common elements of the association's property, and if the owner of
a unit has become delinquent in the payment of installments on the assessment for the
improvement, the authority may certify the delinquent assessment to-the county auditor,
who would then collect the assessment in the manner provided for assessment and
collection of real estate:taxes..
Minneapolis Utility Charge Assessments. Authorizes the city of Minneapolis to place
a lien on property that has delinquent utility. charges, including nuisance abatement
charges or other service or improvement assessments. They become a lien on the ,
property from the date the utility charges become delinquent, regardless of the date the
charge is levied.-
63
Improvements made to certain apartments; Brooklyn Center, Richfield, and St.
__ , __
,Louis Park. ,.
Subdivision 1. (a) Provides that market value increases resulting-from
improvements made after the effective date of this act and prior to January 1, 1999, to
qualifying property located in the city of Brooklyn Center, Richfield, or St. Louis
Park sha1T be excluded for assessment purposes if certain conditions: are. met..
:. ,.
- ; ,:
{b) "Qualifying property" means property that meets all of the following:
(1) the building is at least 30 years old at the time of improvements;-
(2) the building is residential real estate of four or more units and is class 4a, 4c,
or 4d property; and
(3) the total cost of the qualifying improvements exceed $5,000 per unit.
(c) A building permit must be issued prior to commencement of improvements. Only
improvements to structure and garages qualify.. An application is required to be filed
with the assessor.
Research Department Minnesota House of Representatives 600 State Office Building
~vR'
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 230
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a resolution requesting Hennepin County assistance in the oversight
of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Background:
Part of the City of Richfield, mostly the area tributary to Legion Lake, lies within the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). As a follow up to a June 4, 1997
meeting of the cities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a Steering Committee
made up of across-section of elected and appointed officials was formed to provide
direction to the group. On August 19, 1997 the Steering Committee for the cities of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District approved the attached model resolution for
distribution to the cities.
Through discussions gong back at least to the December 1996 City Council Study
Session, Council is aware of the frustrations experienced by staff in dealing with the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on such topics as duplication of regulatory
authority and funding. Other cities in the district experienced both similar and different
concerns. City staff have been working with staff and elected officials from other cities
• to bring these concerns forward. The attached resolution is the result of the concerns
expressed by the cities in the district. Among other things, the resolution asks
Hennepin County to ensure the accountability of the district.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the attached resolution requesting County assistance in the oversight of the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City of Richfield and other cities in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
have expressed concerns about the district, its operations, rules and procedures.
2. The cities of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District formed a Steering
Committee which has provided a model resolution, addressing the concerns
expressed, for cities of the district to consider.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Council may choose to approve an amended proposed resolution as it deems
appropriate.
2. Council may choose not to approve any resolution.
n
U~ ~`
Discussion/Decision Mode:
• This item is scheduled for the September 8, 1997 meeting of the Richfield City Council.
The Steering Committee intends to submit any and all approved resolutions from the
various cities to the County in October. Council should, therefore, take any action no
later than the September 22, 1997 meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam .Prosser
City anager
JDP:cak
Attachment
•
•
~A-a
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REQUESTING COUNTY ASSISTANCE
IN THE OVERSIGHT OF .THE
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield lies partly within the boundaries of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District (MCWD); and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has significant concerns that the MCWD has not
demonstrated good governance in the conduct of its statutory responsibilities; and
WHEREAS, such concerns relate to such matters as: a lack of intergovernmental
.comity and cooperation; a failure to give timely, responsive, and reasonable consideration to
public and private project applications; an apparent unwillingness to give fair consideration to
alternatives for funding MCWD projects; the absence of sound, accurate and thorough
budgeting; a lack of consistency in dealing with municipalities within the District; a failure to
recognize limitations on legal authority of the District and to appreciate and accommodate
local concerns; unreasonable restrictions on minor. developments, redevelopments and
public improvements; a failure to utilize professional staff effectively; excessive expenditure
of public funds for administration, per diem, consultants and travel expenses; inflexible
application and unreasonable interpretation of District rules; and the failure to evaluate fully
. the cost effectiveness of storm water management and water quality improvements and
structural and nonstructural alternatives to such improvements; and
WHEREAS, the actions of the District have resulted in: an unnecessary duplication of
effort among political subdivisions; unnecessary delays and increased costs of development
and redevelopment projects and public improvements; an extraordinary commitment of public
money and staff resources in dealing with the District; an excessive tax burden on the
citizens of the City; delayed provision of needed public facilities; and a declining confidence
in the governance of the affairs of the District; and
WHEREAS, a number of the cities within the MCWD also lie within other watershed
districts or participate in joint powers watershed management organizations where they have
not experienced similar problems; and
WHEREAS, the City has no means of exercising control over the affairs of the MCWD
for the benefit of the City and its citizens, and lacks the resources to monitor, oversee, and
negotiate with the District independently.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield
that:
. 1. The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners is hereby requested to undertake a
thorough investigation of the activities of the MCWD, to monitor and oversee the ongoing
6A 3
activities of the District, to facilitate dialog between the District and affected municipalities, to
consider diligently the cost effectiveness of capital projects proposed by the District and
structural and nonstructural alternatives to such projects prior to approval thereof, and to take
such other actions as the County seems appropriate to ensure the accountability of the
District and address concerns described above.
2. City staff is directed to explore with other cities in the Watershed District joint and
cooperative efforts to monitor and oversee the activities of the MCWD, in cooperation with
Hennepin County.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 8th day of September, 1997.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
• Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
3
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 229
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Accept presentation of Wood Lake Nature Center's home made maple syrup to Council
Members.
Background:
Wood Lake's annual FOWL Ball Golf Klassic is Saturday, September 20.' This event
helps fund projects at the center. As a symbol of the hundreds. of activities Wood Lake
provides participants annually, the staff would like to present a bottle of 1997 WLNC
Maple Syrup, sugared off and bottled from Wood Lake's trees, to each Council
Member.
Recommended Motion:
Accept the presentation of the syrup from Tom Moffat, Wood Lake Naturalist and maple
syrup specialist.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Wood Lake Nature Center provides hundreds of environmentally-based classes
and recreation activities annually. This presentation highlights one of those
activities.
2: The FOWL Ball Golf Klassic raises funds to support Wood Lake projects.
3. The center makes excellent syrup and would like to share it with the Council.
Alternative Recommendation:
None
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Tom Moffat, Nature Center Naturalist, will attend the Council meeting to make the
presentation.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City M Hager
JDP:cak
•
a
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 228
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Proclamation recognizing the first annual National Family Health and Fitness Day on
Sunday, September 28, 1997 at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield, 6400 Portland
Avenue.
Background:
The Recreation Services Department is celebrating the first annual National Family
Health and Fitness Day to promote good health and fitness for citizens and to help
promote a hometown atmosphere with family unity and positive family activities.
Recommended Motion:
Approve an official proclamation by the Mayor designating that the City of Richfield
does officially recognize the first annual National Family Health and Fitness Day and
the events that will take place on Sunday, September 28 at Veterans Memorial Park of
Richfield.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Recreation Services is an essential service that has a positive impact on health,
crime prevention, the environment, the economy and quality of life in the City of
Richfield.
2. Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield has become the central location for many
community and family events and can be utilized for a fitness program of this
magnitude.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for the September 8, 1997 Council meeting. Frank White,
Special Programs Manager, will be present to accept the proclamation.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam .Prosser
City ~ Hager
JDP:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 227
Agenda September 8, 1997
Issue Statement:
Presentation of Quality of Excellence Award to Gretchen Blank, Recreation Services
Director, for playground improvements by Earl F. Andersen, Inc. (EFA, Inc.)
Background:
There were 45 nominees from the State of Minnesota. Criteria is based on the quality
of design including safety, variety of equipment, skill levels for users, color, materials,
creativity and fit in the park site. Nine of the 45 nominees were chosen to receive this
award.
Recommended Motion:
Accept the Quality of Excellence Award from Earl F. Anderson, Inc.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City has spent considerable time and effort upgrading neighborhood park
playgrounds over the past seven years.
2. New playgrounds installed since 1991 include: Jefferson, Madison, Sheridan,
Fremont, Donaldson, Garfield, Augsburg, Nicollet, Roosevelt, Veterans Memorial
Park of Richfield, New .Ford Town, Taft, Christian and Washington.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Warren Anondson, President, and Matt Finnegan, Sales Associate, from EFA, Inc. will
attend the Council meeting to present the award.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam .Prosser
City ager
JDP:cak