The URL can be used to link to this page

5-13-96 agenda0 �C CITY OF RICHFIELD MONDAY, MAY 13, 1996 LOCAL BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL (-CG- APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE RICHFIELD BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF MAY 6, 1996 I. RECONVENING OF 1996 RICHFIELD BOARD OF EQUALIZATION COUNCIL LETTER NO. 144 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. • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. I q `t' Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Reconvening of the 1996 Board of Equalization. Background: On May 6, 1996 the City of Richfield convened the 1996 Board of Equalization. The Board considered ten cases, deferring action on two of the cases to a reconvene date of May 13, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. The continuance was provided to give the appellants and staff an opportunity to prepare data on these properties so that the Board could make an informed decision on each of them. Recommended Motion: Reconvene the Board of Equalization at 6:00 p.m. May 13, 1996 and take action based on the information presented at the hearing. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Reconvening of the Board has been scheduled publicly at the May 6 meeting. 2. Information needed for the Board to make a determination on the remaining appeals will be available at or prior to the hearing. 3. The Board of Equalization must conclude its business within 20 days of May 6, 1996. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion /Decision Mode: It would be desirable to conclude the proceedings of the Board of Equalization on May 13, 1996. Respectfully submitted, Jam s . Prosser City nager JDP:cak 0 • • L-] AGENDA Reconvened 1996 Local Board of Review City of Richfield May 13, 1996 1. Kevin Kilian 7009 5th Avenue South 34- 028 -24 -11 -0085 2. Wendy Larson 6945 Columbus Avenue South 26- 028 -24 -33 -0033 1996 EMV Recommendation Report Not Included $100,000 $96,000 Owner Concurs 93,000 No Change i • • SUBJECT PROPERTY ADDRESS 6945 Columbus Avenue South PI D# 26- 028 -24 -33 -0033 Sale Price $91,000 Sale Date 4/86 Story Height 1.25 Year Built 1954 Ground Floor Area 832 sq. ft Gross Building Area 1040 sq. ft. Fireplaces 0 Central Air Conditioning Yes Bathrooms 1/0/1 Finished Bsmt. Area 416 sq.ft. Garage 2 car detached Porches / Decks Other / Comments The subject has a pool. Lot Size 75 x 131 GRID - COMPARABLE DATA APPLICANTS NAME: Wendy Larson ADDRESS: 6945 Columbus Avenue South PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6945 Columbus Avenue South P.I.D. #: 26-028- 24-33 -0033 MUNIC: Richfield COMP -SALE DATA: SALE DATE 4/86 SALE PRICE $91,000 SALE/SQ.FI". /GBA $87.50 2194 6/94 5/94 $97,900 $90,500 $95,200 $93.51 $87.02 $93.33 6/95 $102,500 $88.06 SUBJECT ASSMT DATA SUBJECT-REVIEW APPRAISAL 1996 ASSESSMENT $93,000 $96,500 ASSESSMENT /SQ.FT. $89.42 $92.79 REMARKS: The subject property was last Inspected December 2, 1994 for the 1995 assessment. A request was made to re- Inspect for the 1995 Local Board Appeal. The applicant did not make arrangements for this inspection. Another request was made to re- inspect the property for the 1996 Local Board Appeal. The applicant indicated it was not necessary for us to inspect 0 Comparable Sales COMPARABLE #1 RICHFIELD 6844 CHICAGO AVE. S. 0 COMPARABLE #2 RICHFIELD 6820 PARK AVE. S. COMPARABLE #3 COMPARABLE #4 RICHFIELD RICHFIELD 6639 OAKLAND AVE. S. 661615TH AVE. S. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, MAY 13, 1996 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 APRIL 22, 1996 AND (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 6, 1996 PRESENTATIONS • 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 2. PRESENTATION OF CONCRETE PAVING ,ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA AWARD FOR OUTSTANDING PAVEMENT CONSTRUCTION ON 77TH STREET COUNCIL LETTER NO. 145 3. PRESENTATION DECLARING NATASHA SUKALO FROM ICHNYA, UKRAINE AN HONORARY CITIZEN OF CITY OF RICHFIELD 4. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING SMALL BUSINESS WEEK IN RICHFIELD, JUNE 2-8,1996 5. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING CITY OF RICHFIELD EMPLOYEE HEALTH AND FITNESS WEE:, MAY 14-16,1996 6. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DESIGNATING WASHINGTON PARKAS REGISTERED PEACE SITE COUNCIL LETTER NO. 146 7. PRESENTATIONS FROM LOCAL LEGISLATORS REGARDING RECENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION 46 AGENDA APPROVAL 8. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT CALENDAR 9. 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. APPROVAL. A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY TO CONTINUE PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM C.L. 147 B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPROVING GAMBLING LICENSE WITH FEE WAIVER FOR FRED BABCOCK VFW POST #5555, 710 LAKE • SHORE DRIVE C.L. 148 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF $350,000 AS SETTLEMENT OF ALL CLAIMS RELATED TO PARTIAL TAKING OF PROPERTY FROM HOUSE OF PRAYER LUTHERAN CHURCH; 77TH STREET PROJECT C.L. 149 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MTI DISTRIBUTING CO. FOR NEW ROTARY MOWER TO BE USED AT RICH ACRES GOLF COURSE IN AMOUNT OF $34,595.80 C.L. 150 PUBLIC HEARINGS 10. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 905, ANIMAL CONTROL, REGARDING LICENSING OF PETS (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 22,1996)' COUNCIL LETTER NO. 151 11. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING REQUEST FOR AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ACADEMY OF HOLY ANGELS, 6600 NICOLLET AVENUE, TO CONSTRUCT SEASONAL SPORTS FACILITY (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 22, 1996) • COUNCIL LETTER NO. 152 12. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF INTERIM ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING STUDY TO BE CONDUCTED PERTAINING TO REGULATING AND 40 LICENSING OF TATTOO BUSINESS AND PLACING MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH USES WITHIN CITY COUNCIL LETTER NO. 153 13. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT . RELATING TO CITY COUNCIL SALARIES COUNCIL LETTER NO. 154 RESOLUTION 14. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING REOPENER ISSUES OF LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, LOCAL 123 BARGAINING UNIT FOR 1996 COUNCIL LETTER NO. 155 -•-• •01 15. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING LAND AT 6228 PENN AVENUE FROM MULTIPLE RESIDENCE AND INDUSTRIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL COUNCIL LETTER NO. 156 16. CONSIDERATION OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING LAND FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO PLANNED GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AMERICINN HOTEL, 1200 EAST 18TH STREET COUNCIL LETTER NO. 157 17. CONSIDERATION OF FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REZONING LAND AT 7700 LYNDALE AVENUE FROM HIGH DENSITY COMMERCIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND REFER MATTER TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL LETTER NO. 158 18. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF PETITION TO VACATE ALLEY EASEMENT LOCATED IN 7300 BLOCK BETWEEN PLEASANT AND GRAND AVENUES; AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE VACATING ALLEY • EASEMENT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 159 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS 19. CONSIDERATION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND HENNEPIN COUNTY TITLED COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE DESIGN OF AN 800 MHZ TRUNK RADIO AND DIGITAL MICROWAVE SYSTEM COUNCIL LETTER NO. 160 20. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER AIA CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT DOCUMENT FOR FOURTH MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORE, 7700 LYNDALE AVENUE, CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COUNCIL LETTER NO. 161 21. CONSIDERATION OF YOUTH APPOINTMENTS TO ADVISORY BOARD OF HEALTH, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AND FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION COUNCIL LETTER NO. 162 22. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT. 23. LEGISLATIVE REPORT AIRPORT BUSINESS CORRESPONDENCE rni INCIL CHOICE 24. ANNOUNCEMENT OF DATE CP 4NGE OF REGULARLY SCHEDULED CITY COUNCIL MEETING FROM MAY 27 TO MAY 28 25. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 26. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS 27. ADJOURNMENT Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in ctdvance to the Administrative Services Director at 861 -9702. 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 162 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Consideration of youth appointments to the Advisory Board of Health, Human Rights Commission and Friendship City Commission. Background: The Advisory Board of Health, Human Rights Commission and Friendship City Commission each have two youth vacancies. Persons interested in serving on the commissions were interviewed on May 6, 1996 at a Special City Council meeting. Appointments are effective June 1, 1996 through May 31, 1997. Recommended Motion: Appoint youth members to serve on the Advisory Board of Health, Human Rights Commission and Friendship City Commission. Basis of Recommendation: 1. In order to ensure a quorum for future meetings, youth appointments to the commissions should be made at this time. 2. These youth appointments will complete the membership of the Advisory Board of Health, Human Rights Commission and Friendship City Commission. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Defer the youth appointments to a later Council meeting. Discussion /Decision Mode: This item is placed on the May 13, 1996 agenda for Council consideration. Respectfully submitted, QV Ja JD. Prosser City Manager JDP:cak 0 0 r� L N N �U C U c6 N Z N N O v F- C� Q V M M M M M M f� cc m cc m N N �U C U c6 N Z N N O v F- C� Q • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 161 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Council authorization for City Manager to enter AIA construction management document for fourth municipal liquor store construction project. Background: The architect for the fourth municipal liquor store project has recommended an alternative to the traditional general contractor method for a more timely and cost effective construction process. Choosing a construction management firm for coordination and supervision of projects has become a more common alternative for municipalities and the private sector. The project architect has indicated that construction is most often completed in a more timely manner due to sub - contract bidding coordination and likely would cost less than general contractor total bid submissions. • The following construction manager service proposals were solicited: • Weis Builders, Minneapolis, MN • A & P Construction, St. Louis Park, MN • E & V Inc., Minneapolis, MN • Greystone Construction Company, Shakopee, MN The proposal will be received by staff with a recommendation to be provided at the City Council meeting of May 13. Recommended Motion: Direct/authorize City Manager to enter standard AIA construction management agreement for the construction of the fourth municipal liquor store at 7700 Lyndale Avenue. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The total project is estimated to cost $720,000. 2. Construction schedule would take less time under construction management supervision and bidding process. 3. Total construction costs most likely would be less including management fees . opposed to general contractor's bid. 4. Consistent supervision by City contracted construction manager would ensure proper construction guidelines throughout project construction. 5. Funds are available for project construction. Alternative Recommendation: Instruct staff and architect to prepare specifications for advertisement for bid to general contract. Discussion /Decision Mode: Authorization to enter construction management agreement is critical to the timing of project implementation and completion prior to high volume retail sales at year -end. Respectfuliv submitted, Jam . Prosser City ager JDP:cak • C 0 • • CITY OF RICHFIELD ACQUISITION OF 4TH LIQUOR STORE CAPITAL COSTS Land Acquisition Structure (Based upon $70 -80 sq.ft.; 113 cost for basement) 5,500 sq.ft. each floor Architectural Service Site Observation Refrigeration (product cooler) Shelving Checkout (Point of Sale) fixtures Signage Communications Alarm (intrusion, fire suppression) Surveillance System Point of Sale Registers Blacktop, landscaping /irrigation Miscellaneous (office equip, shopping carts, janitorial supplies, credit card validator) ATTACHMENT A .��)6 �O —J— ESTIMATED USEFUL ACQUISITION LIFE ANNUAL COST (YEARS) DEPRECIATION ? N/A $ 585,000.00 30 $ 19,500.00 30,000.00 30 1,000 15,000.00 30 500.00 35,000.00 10 3,500.00 10,000.00 10 1,000.00 8,000.00 10 800.00 7,000.00 10 700.00 3,500.00 10 350.00 2,500.00 10 250.00 5,000.00 10 500.00 8,000.00 5 1,600.00 5,000.00 10 500.00 2,000.00 3 666.67 $ 716,000.00 $ 30,866.67 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 160 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: City Council approval of an agreement between the City and Hennepin County titled Cooperative Agreement for Participation in the Design of an 800 MHz Trunk Radio and Digital Microwave S sy tem. Background: As an independent 9 -1 -1 Public Safety Answering Point, the City will have the opportunity to participate as an initial user of the countywide 800 MHz trunked radio system scheduled to go out to bid in 1996 and be constructed in the 1998 to 1999 time frame. Participation by the City in the microwave design phase of the countywide 800 MHz trunked radio project requires City Council approval of the attached document, Cooperative Aareement for Partibipatioi7 in the Desian of an 800 MHz Trunk Radio and Digital Microwav Recommended Motion: It is recommended that the City Council approve the agreement between the City and Hennepin County titled Cooperative Agreement for Participation in the Design of an 800 MHz Trunk Radio and Digital Microwave :24tem. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Participation by the City in the initial, cooperative design of the 800 MHz trunk radio system will limit the City's cost for the design phase to a fixed fee of $3,800. If the City were to act independently at a later date, the design cost for the City is likely to be higher. 2. The City Attorney has reviewed the document and discussed it with the Public Safety Director. The City Attorney suggested that the $3,800 be refunded if Hennepin County failed to perform. However, since this is a county (even metro) project, there is very little chance that performance would be an issue. In the final analysis, the City Attorney believed that, because of the small value of this agreement, the City need not be too insistent on any changes. 3. The City is currently evaluating alternative 911 dispatch options. This process is in a preliminary stage and no official position has been taken by the City. The City should remain involved in the 800 MHz trunk radio design process to preserve its options until final resolution of the 911 dispatch issue. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay participation as a user of the 800 MHz trunked radio system until some future date and fund all associated redesign costs at that time. Discussion /Decision Mode: City Council is being asked to approve an agreement between the City and Hennepin County titled Cooperative Agreement for Participation in the Design of an 800 MHz Trunk Radio and Digital Microwave System. Respectfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser City anager JDP:ds • AA Code: Contract No.: A16016 Tax ID No. /Soc Sec No.: Vendor No.: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE DESIGN OF AN 800 MHz TRUNK RADIO AND DIGITAL MICROWAVE SYSTEM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, a body politic and corporate, under the laws of the STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," A -2300 Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and the City of Richfield, 6700 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota 55423, acting by and through its duly authorized officers, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY ". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, an effective public safety two -way radio communications system is a critical element in providing • emergency services and protecting lives and property; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, a body politic and corporate, has the power, pursuant to Minnesota Statute, to adopt and supervise the implementation of a county -wide public safety radio communication system for Hennepin County; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY has determined that in order to perform its duties to implement a county -wide public safety radio communication system, it is necessary to enter into a contract for design of such a system; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY entered into an agreement with Ronald Vegemast Engineering, Inc. (CONSULTANT) to finalize design for a county -wide public safety radio communication system; and WHEREAS, the agreement entered into between the COUNTY and CONSULTANT permits the COUNTY to engage the CONSULTANT in additional tasks, which essentially are those tasks associated with local municipal microwave connection to the county -wide backbone system; and WHEREAS, the CITY desires to purchase the services of CONSULTANT for final design services for the CITY's microwave connection to the system; and • WHEREAS, the CITY will contract with the COUNTY for payment of design services contemplated herein, and the COUNTY will direct the CONSULTANT to provide these services. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual undertakings and agreements hereinafter set forth, the COUNTY and the CITY agree as follows: ARTICLE I. PURPOSE 1.01 The purpose of this Agreement is to define the rights and obligations of the COUNTY and CITY with respect to the planning, design and management of the services contemplated under this Agreement. ARTICLE II. COOPERATION 2.01 The COUNTY and the CITY will cooperate and use their best efforts to ensure that the various provisions of the Agreement are fulfilled. The parties agree in good faith to undertake resolutions of disputes, if any, in an equitable and timely manner and in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement. ARTICLE III. TERM 3.01 This Agreement will commence upon the date of the last Board approval of each of the governmental units and terminate on December 31, 1996, or upon completion of the work contemplated under this Agreement, whichever occurs later, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Article XIII or XIV of this Agreement. ARTICLE IV. SCOPE OF SERVICES 4.01 The COUNTY shall direct the CONSULTANT to provide the microwave path engineering and site evaluation work in accordance with task 1 of Exhibit A for the CITY's participation as a 9 -1 -1 dispatch center in the county- wide 800 MHz Trunked Radio System. Conditional upon execution of a future agreement on or before September 1, 1996 between the COUNTY and the CITY whereby the CITY agrees to commit to construction and payment of microwave equipment and maintenance costs, the COUNTY will incorporate such microwave equipment in the final system bidding specifications. The COUNTY shall provide the CITY with one copy of the CONSULTANT's site evaluation report and microwave path (2) /9 -q • engineering data. Upon request, the COUNTY will provide the CITY with one copy of final microwave system bidding specifications. ARTICLE V. COMPENSATION 5.01 The total compensation payable to the COUNTY under this Agreement for services performed by the CONSULTANT as listed in the Exhibit A shall be Three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($3,800). It is mutually agreed by the COUNTY and the CITY that the total price of the work as shown in the Exhibit A is based on the work effort and expense level established by a negotiation between COUNTY and the CONSULTANT. ARTICLE VI. PAYMENT FOR SERVICES 6.01 The CITY shall make full payment to the COUNTY within thirty (30) days of the execution of Agreement by both parties. The CITY's payment is non - refundable. ARTICLE VII. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR 7.01 Each party is, and shall remain, an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Each party shall select the means, method, and manner of performing their respective services herein. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co- partners between the parties hereto or as constituting either party as the agent, representative, or employee of the other for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Each party represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required in performing their respective services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of either party or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services under this Agreement shall have no contractual relationship with the other party, and shall not be considered an employee of any other party. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Unemployment Compensation Act, the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota, or any other applicable Federal or State law, rule, or regulation on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment, including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against either party, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the other party. Each party shall defend, indemnify, and hold the other party, its officers, (3) IQ-5 agents, and employees harmless from any and all such claims. Such personnel or other persons shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the other party, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Re- Employment Insurance, disability, severance pay, or PERA. ARTICLE VIII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE 8.01 Each party agrees that it shall be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof, to the extent authorized by the law, and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The COUNTY's and the CITY's liability is governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. The COUNTY and the CITY each warrant that they are able to comply with the aforementioned indemnity requirements through an insurance or self - insurance program. ARTICLE IX. DATA PRIVACY 9.01 COUNTY and CITY each agree to abide by all applicable State and Federal laws and regulations concerning the handling and disclosure of private and confidential information concerning individuals and /or data including but not limited to information made non - public by such laws or regulations. ARTICLE X. MINNESOTA LAWS GOVERN AND SEVERABILITY 10.01 The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern all questions and interpretations concerning the validity and construction of this Agreement and the legal relations and performance obligations between the parties herein. ARTICLE XI. RECORDS — AVAILABILITY 11.01 COUNTY agrees that the CITY, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours, and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to (4) gig^ the accounting practices and procedures of COUNTY and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. ARTICLE XII. MERGER AND MODIFICATION 12.01 a. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All items referred to in this Agreement are incorporated or attached and are deemed to be part of this Agreement. b. Any alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. ARTICLE XIII. CANCELLATION 13.01 The CITY shall have the right to terminate this Agreement -at any time for any reason by giving written notice to the COUNTY of such termination and specifying the effective date therefore at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of such termination. In the event of cancellation, the CITY shall forfeit all fees paid to the COUNTY. The COUNTY will remove the microwave equipment intended for the CITY's use from the design specifications. ARTICLE XIV. DEFAULT 14.01 If COUNTY shall fail to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement properly and timely, or if COUNTY shall violate any of the covenants, agreements, or stipulations of this Agreement, thereupon the CITY shall have the right to terminate this Agreement if the default has not been cured within thirty (30) days from the date on which the COUNTY received written notice specifying the default. This Agreement may then be terminated by the CITY giving at least ten (10) days written notice to COUNTY of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof. A. It is agreed that any right or remedy provided for herein shall not be considered as the exclusive right or remedy of the CITY for any default in any respect by COUNTY, but such right or remedy shall be (5) 19--7 considered to be in addition to any right or remedy hereunder or allowed by law, equity, or statute. B. The CITY's failure to insist upon strict performance of any covenant, agreement, or stipulation of this Agreement or to exercise any right herein contained shall not be a waiver or relinquishment of such covenant, agreement, stipulation, or right, unless the CITY consents thereto in writing. Any such written consent shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment in the future of such covenant, agreement, stipulation or right. ARTICLE XV. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 15.01 In order to coordinate the services of COUNTY with the activities of the CITY so as to accomplish the purposes of this Agreement, the following individuals or their designees shall manage this Agreement on behalf of the COUNTY and CITY. COUNTY: Roger Laurence Hennepin County Radio Communications Manager 9300 Naper Street Golden Valley, MN 55427 CITY: ARTICLE XVI. PAPER RECYCLING 16.01 The COUNTY encourages CITY to develop and implement an office paper and newsprint recycling program. ARTICLE XVII. NOTICES 17.01 Any notice, report or demand which must be given or made by a party hereto under the terms of this Agreement or any statute or ordinance shall be in writing, and shall be sent registered or certified mail. Notices to the COUNTY shall be sent to the County Administrator and contract administrator at the addresses given in the opening paragraph and contained in Article XV to this Agreement. Notice to CITY shall be sent to the contract administrator at the address as given in Article XVII. {6) L COUNTY BOARD APPROVAL COUNTY, having signed this contract, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this contract on the day of , 19 , and pursuant to such approval, the proper COUNTY officials having signed this contract, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth.. Approved as to form. Assistant County Attorney Date: Approved as to execution. Assistant County Attorney Date: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chair of Its County Board Date: And: Associate /County Administrator ATTEST: Deputy /Clerk of County Board CITY OF RICHFIELD The Richfield City Council duly approved this Agreement on the day of , 1996. Approved as to form and legality: Richfield City Attorney • ::CIVIL$:(CQNTRACTIACREE.EC0;1 (7) CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Its Mayor And: Its City Manager PATRICK D. McGOWAN HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF ROOM 6 COURTHOUSE 350 SOUTH FIFTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 (612) 348 -3740 FAX 348 -4208 March 5, 1996 Mr. James Prosser City Manager 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Mr. Prosser.: y liu ;+l /9-9 �T v irr y_ i, fr'lA c� •,g HE SHERIFF As an independent 9 -1 -1 Public Safety Answering Point, your PSAP will have the opportunity to participate as an initial user of the countywide 800 MHz trunked radio system scheduled to go out to bid later this year and be constructed in the 1998 to 1999 time frame. A microwave link is required for an independent city to connect its dispatching console to the 800 MHz radio network. The microwave design for the first phase will be conducted in July and August, 1996. In addition to providing dispatch console access to the radio network, the microwave system may carry high speed data links for MINCIS and Hennepin County information systems, 9 -1 -1 trunk alternate routing and possibly video feeds from MrMOT's traffic management center. A city intending to convert to 800 MHz after 1999 may find it advantageous to install the microwave link initially for these other services, along with the anticipated cost savings with a larger bulk purchase. The County will own and maintain the microwave equipment installed in independent PSAPs to maintain performance and integrity of the countywide backbone. The cost of providing microwave to an independent PSAP will be the responsibility of the benefitting city. It is anticipated that microwave equipment will be offered by the County through lease and maintenance agreements. Dispatching consoles will be continue to be purchased by each city. County owned mobile and portable radios will continue to be available through lease and maintenance agreements, or can be purchased directly by cities. Other capital costs of the countywide 800 MHz infrastructure will be funded by the County. Hennepin County is entering into a Professional Services Agreement with Ronald Vegemast Engineering, Inc. to complete the design of the Hennepin County portion of the regionwide network. This agreement will include a task to design microwave paths and develop specification language for microwave connections to those independent dispatch centers electing to be initial participants (see attachment). Vegemast has indicated that these design services can be provided to your city for a fixed fee of $3,800. Vegemast also indicated that this work does not include . structural analysis of existing towers, soil analysis for new towers and architectural design work for any facility improvements. These additional design services will be the responsibility of each city and can be done at a later date. ca Recycled Paper 0% Post- Consumer Fiber 0 /9--/0 The microwave paths are interdependent such that the participation decisions of all independent PSAPs must be known prior to commencing microwave final design. Firm construction commitments will be necessary prior to publication of the system Request for Proposals, tentatively scheduled for September or October, 1996. This date is fluid since Mn/DOT and the Metropolitan Radio Board are managing the overall metro regionwide system procurement process and the Hennepin County subsystem will be included in the State bidding documents. The following specific action items will be necessary for your city to participate as an initial 9 -1 -1 dispatch point of the countywide 800 MHz system: 1. Mail a letter of intent to participate in the microwave system design by April 5, 1996, signed by the City's Chief Executive Officer, to: Mr. Roger Laurence, Radio Communications Managet, 9300 Naper Street, Golden Valley, MN 55427. 2. City Council approval of a cooperative agreement (contract) for the $3,800 design services with the County by May 15, 1996. (The Hennepin County Attorney's Office will prepare this agreement for city review by April 10, 1996.) 3. City Council approval of a lease agreement (contract) for microwave equipment with the County by September 1, 1996. This will entail committing to microwave construction and lease payments commencing in 1998, along with issues regarding access to city facilities by county communications technicians. (The Hennepin County Attorney's Office will prepare this agreement for city review by July 15, 1996.) Attached is the current estimated project schedule along with a budgetary estimate of system costs for a typical independent city. Please contact either Sheriff's Captain Richard Esensten at 525 -6206 or Sheriff's Radio Communications Manager Roger Laurence at 525 -6232 if there are any questions regarding this opportunity for your city. Sincerely, a wan Hennepin County Sheriff cc: Director John Erskine • Chief Steven Sutter attachments PDM/ek 1q-11 Excerpts of Professional Services Agreement between Hennepin County and Ronald Vegemast Engineering, Inc.: Task 1. Participation Of Independent Suburban Dispatch Centers Consultant will provide engineering, including specification wording, for microwave path analysis for each independent municipality within Hennepin County that elects to connect to the system as a subscriber. The work to be performed includes the development of microwave path profiles showing the minimum height above ground that will be required for each of the microwave antennas. The path profiles will be verified if the 0.6 Fresnel zone clearance at 6 gHz is less than 75 feet above an assumed height for trees using USGS quad maps. Where possible, the actual physical paths will be checked using binoculars. Floor space for microwave radio and multiplex equipment will be evaluated in independent municipality buildings. Routes for microwave waveguides will be analyzed. Existing antenna support structures will be observed. The work included will not include any tower structural analysis and/or any architectural or related construction engineering work. Required structural engineering and/or architectural work that might be required can only be determined after the initial work described above is completed. The work described will be performed for a fixed fee per municipality as follows: Ronald Vegemast - 12 hours @ $122.00/hour $ 1,464.00 Greg LaVick - 32 hours @ $73/hour 2.336.00 Total $ 3,800.00 • 0 • MWAM April 10, 1996 Richfield Public Safety 6700 Portland Avenue •Richfield, Minnesota 55423 -2599 City Manager Mayor Council James D. Prosser Martin Kirsch Don Priebe Michael Sandahl Susan Rosenberg Russ Susag Mr. Roger Laurence Radio Communications Manager Hennepin County Sheriff's Radio 9300 Naper Street Golden Valley, MN 55427 Dear Mr. Laurence: The City of Richfield would like to participate in the 800 MHz trunked radio system design. As you know, the City is currently exploring the feasibility of moving its PSAP to the Hennepin County Communications Center. The final decision on this matter will, undoubtedly, impact the microwave system design. The City anticipates reaching a decision on the future of the Richfield PSAP by late second or early third quarter of 1996. Please contact Captain Vaughn Lambert, Richfield Public Safety /Police Division, at 861 -9820 if you need additional information. Si E?s D. Prosser Manager Copy: J. Erskine, Director of Public Safety V�/. Lambert, Police Captain JDP:Imv The Urban Hometown Non - emergency (24 hr.) General City Matters POLICE /FIRE/EMERGENCY (612)861 -9800 An Equa(EOOW1uR7[9LEmployer DIAL 911 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 159 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: First reading of an ordinance amendment to vacate an alley easement located in the 7300 block between Pleasant and Grand Avenues. Background: The applicant is requesting that the City vacate the alley easement located in the 7300 block between Pleasant and Grand Avenues. An alley was never constructed in this location and there are no plans to do so in the future. Recommended Motion: Adopt a resolution acknowledging receipt of petition to vacate an alley easement located in the 7300 block between Pleasant and Grand Avenues; approve first reading of the attached ordinance; and set a public hearing and second reading for June 10, 1996. Basis of Recommendation: 1. There is no public purpose for retaining an easement for the alley. 2. The vacation process requires that 50 percent of the abutting property owners sign the petition; all but one abutting property owner (7316 Pleasant Avenue) signed the petition. 3. A drainage and utility easement is maintained. 4. Community Services Department supports the vacation. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Deny the vacation at first reading. 2. Refer the petition to the Planning Commission for review. Discussion /Decision Mode: First reading is set for May 13, 1996. If approved, a public hearing and second reading will be scheduled on June 10, 1996. Resp ly submitted, James Prosser City Ma ager JDP:ds /8-1 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RECEIVING ALLEY VACATION PETITION AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Clerk requesting the vacation of an alley easement described as follows: Alley in Block 8, Irwindale Addition, Richfield, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, said petition complies in all respects with the requirements of Richfield Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. The petition for vacation of the Alley in Block 8, Irwindale Addition, Richfield Minnesota is received. 2. A public hearing on the alley vacation in said petition shall be held on June 10, 1996. 3. The City Clerk is directed to publish notice of such hearing in the official newspaper of the City and post notice of said hearing in the manner provided by Richfield Ordinance. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of May, 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor I 9 ORDINANCE NO. A TRANSITORY ORDINANCE VACATING AN ALLEY EASEMENT THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The following described land is subject to an easement for public alley purposes: Block 8, Irwindale Addition, Richfield, Minnesota Section 2. The vacation shall be subject to a drainage and utility easement five feet in width on either side of the center line of the alley, as described in Section 1. Section 3. The Council finds that there is no longer a public need for an alley easement over that portion of land in the 7300 block between Pleasant Avenue and Grand Avenue, as described in Section 1. Section 4. The alley easement over that portion of land, as described in Section 1 of this Ordinance, is hereby vacated. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Tom Ferber, City Clerk • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor CITY OF RICHFIELD MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 158 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: First reading of an ordinance amendment rezoning land at 7700 Lyndale Avenue from C -3 (high density commercial) to C -2 (general commercial). Background: The City is in the process of purchasing the property at 7700 Lyndale Avenue to install a right turn lane from eastbound 77th Street to southbound Lyndale Avenue. On August 14, 1995 the Council approved a plan to develop a fourth municipal liquor store on the residual property. The property was zoned C -3 (high density commercial) in the late 1980s to encourage high density commercial development along 1 -494. The parcel that will remain after the taking will not be large enough to support high density commercial development. The minimum lot size for a project in the C -3 district is 1.5 acres; the parcel at 7700 Lyndale Avenue after the taking will be 0.4 acres. Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of the attached ordinance amendment rezoning land at 7700 Lyndale Avenue from C -3 (high density commercial) to C -2 (general commercial); refer the matter to the Planning Commission for their recommendation; and set a public hearing and second reading for June 10, 1996. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The parcel that remains in this portion of the ILN Redevelopment Area does not meet the minimum lot size requirement for the C -3 district and is not large enough to support high density development. 2. The proposed municipal liquor store offers a workable project given the site constraints. 3. The proposed retail use and C -2 zoning are consistent with the adjacent retail shopping center and with the Comprehensive Plan. Alternative Recommendation: Deny the rezoning at first reading. Discussion /Decision Mode: First reading is set for May 13, 1996. If approved, a public hearing and second reading will be scheduled on June 10, 1996. Respe tf y submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds a • 0 -1 Bill No. 1995- AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX I OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Appendix I which describes the boundaries of the various zoning districts of the City is hereby amended in the following respect: A. Section 4, Paragraph (2) is amended to read as follows: (2) M -14 6 That area bounded by I -494 on the south, 77th Street on the north, Lyndale Avenue on the west, and the Soo Line Railway on the East; and bets 1 thfough 5, Bleek 1, B. Section 3, Paragraph (65) is amended to read as follows: (65) M -14 Lots 1 through 5, Block 1. Strand's 2nd Addition. D. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of 7700 Lyndale Avenue from C -3 to C -2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor • PROPOSED ZONING 77TH STREET INTERSTATE 494 POST TAKING PROPERTY LINE W D z W a W J a 0 z 9 / /)-a. A( NORTH SCALE: V=10' 5 -6 -96 • E CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 157 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Consideration of a planned unit development plan and first reading of an ordinance amendment rezoning land from C -2 (general commercial) to PC -2 (planned general commercial) to allow construction of an Americlnn hotel, 1200 East 78th Street. Background: Northern Hospitality, Inc. is requesting City approval to construct a 60 unit Americlnn hotel at 1200 East 78th Street. The limited service hotel will include a pool, meeting room, full lobby and continental breakfast area for guests. The exterior of the building will be finished in Cape Cod gray cedar and brick. Sixty parking spaces will be provided at one space per room. City parking guidelines require additional parking for employees. There will be two to three employees on duty during the evening when the number of customers will be at maximum. The applicant anticipates that the hotel will provide service to a number of customers arriving from the airport via taxi service and consequently, will require fewer than one space per room. The main access to the site will be off of 78th Street. An additional right -in, right -out access will be located off of 77th Street. The plans for upgrading 1-494 call for eliminating the 12th Avenue entrance to the freeway. At that time, the main access to the site will be moved to 12th Avenue. An agreement will be signed between the City and the developer to reflect the anticipated change. The proposal differs from the requirements of the C -2 district in building height and setbacks. The building is four - and -a -half stories (53 feet) where the maximum number of stories permitted in a C -2 district is three. The setback off of 78th Street varies from 10 to 40 feet where the C -2 requirement is 20 feet. The tallest portion of the building and the smaller setback are oriented to the freeway, minimizing the impact on neighboring properties. The applicant submitted an optional site plan that reduced the number of stories to three - and -a -half; however, the larger building footprint that was required for the lower height hindered circulation within and around the site. The small size of the parcel and the proximity to signalized intersections limits the potential access points to the site. Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of the attached ordinance amendment rezoning 1200 East 78th Street from C -2 (general commercial) to PC -2 (planned general commercial), and set a public hearing and second reading for June 10, 1996. 1 (0_1 Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposal provides a workable plan given the size of the site, access issues, and adjacent land uses. 2. The development is in substantial conformance with the original C -2 (general commercial) district. 3. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and one of the goals of the 77th Street project to encourage more intense development along 1 -494 while maintaining a separation from the residential neighborhood. 4. On April 23, 1996 the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the rezoning and the planned unit development plan. 5. On April 16, 1996 the developer held an information open house at the Elliot Center for site neighbors. The response was favorable. Alternative Recommendation: Deny this rezoning at first reading. Discussion /Decision Mode: First reading is set for May 13, 1996. If approved, a public hearing and second reading will be scheduled on June 10, 1996. RespectfidUy submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds U 0 / (0 —c)- Bill No. 1995- AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX I OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Appendix I which describes the boundaries of the various zoning districts of the City is hereby amended in the following respect: A. Section 3, Paragraph (49) is amended to read as follows: (49) M -18 (S of 77th near Bloomington) That area lying between the center lines of 77th and 78th Streets, and between the center lines of 424h and Cedar Avenue, and the °^s* 125 fps* *of line of 1 i th n venue o , *eadea and the eente . line „f 12th Avenue and a line parallel to and 230 feet east of the center line of 12th Avenue. B. Section 8, Paragraph (64) is amended to read as follows: (64) M -18 (W of 78th near 121h) That area leg between the north line of 78th Street and a line 135 feet north of said line and between the west line of 12th Avenue and a line 185 feet west of said line. C. Section 7, Paragraph (7) is amended to read as follows: (7) M -18 (E side of 12th S of 77th) That area lying between the center lines of 77th and 78th Streets. and between the center line of 12th Avenue and a line parallel to and 230 feet east of the center line of 12th Avenue, D. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of 1200 East 78th Street from C -2 to PC -2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor I0 i i f B' Parking Lot Setback (not to scale) It f HT 56 PARING STALLS 4 PC STALLS LOT AREA 43,426.2 S. F. �a HG POO1- ELEV. � � 1 i A -3 G I NN S! Ti- S T UD T -R I G�4F I EL.D GRAPNIG SCALE 0 20 BO :20 TRLJI" f AN NOkELL AZGN TEGTS ASSOCIATES, INC. 18202 1-1INNF-T0N<A 5LVD, 1�A-T'ZATA, I" N. 33381 F; 4O E: G12-44q-1::`I303 FAX: 612-44c-i-0552 mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm im ii ii mm im ii ii mm F mm mm mm mm mm m mm mm Mm Mm MM MM MM Mm MM MM mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mmimm'Irmm mm PI • mm mm iii mi ii mm ii ii 15- CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 156 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: First reading of an ordinance amendment rezoning land from MR (multiple residence) and I (industrial) to C -2 (general commercial) at 6228 Penn Avenue. Background: Lunds is requesting City approval to rezone the property at 6228 Penn Avenue from multiple residence and industrial to general commercial. The eastern portion of the property is occupied by the grocery store and is zoned industrial. The western portion of the property is vacant and is zoned multiple residence. A rezoning would allow Lunds to develop approximately 9,800 square feet of additional retail space on the western portion of the site at some time in the future. Future development of the property would trigger review of the specific proposal by staff to ensure compliance with the City's off - street parking standards. The applicant has already addressed several of the items that would be required for an off - street parking permit, such as on -site stormwater management and landscaping, when it remodeled the store in the fall of 1995. The applicant met with the neighborhood several times to explain the proposed plans and to seek input. In response to the neighbors' concerns, the applicant installed a 25- foot wide landscaped berm along the western boundary of the property. At the Planning Commission meeting on April 23, 1996 neighbors expressed additional concern with the store's delivery schedule. The applicant agreed to continue working on the timing of deliveries. Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of the attached ordinance amendment rezoning 6228 Penn Avenue from MR (multiple residence) and I (industrial) to C -2 (general commercial); and set a public hearing and second reading for June 10, 1996. Basic of Recommendation: 1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of mixed land use, which includes retail as a principal use. 2. The applicant has made several improvements to the property in anticipation of future development of the subject property. 3. Future construction will trigger a review of the off - street parking permit to ensure that adequate parking exists and that conflict with the adjacent residential use is minimized. l5 -1 4. The property at 6228 Penn Avenue is one of a few remaining MR -zoned properties. Staff and the Planning Commission have worked to eliminate the multiple residence (MR) district in the City. 5. On April 23, 1996 the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the rezoning. Alternative Recommendation: Deny the rezoning at first reading. Discussion /Decision Mode: First reading is set for May 13, 1996. If approved, a public hearing and second reading will be scheduled on June 10, 1996. Respec5VIly submitted, James t. Prosser City Manager 0 JDP:ds • • Bill No. 1995- AMENDMENT TO APPENDIX I OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Appendix I which describes the boundaries of the various zoning districts of the City is hereby amended in the following respect: A. Section 1, Paragraph (1) is amended to read as follows: (1) M -9, 10 That area lying between the center lines of Penn and Queen Avenues, and between the center lines of 62*d 63rd and 65th Streets. B. Section 3, Paragraph (64) is amended to read as follows: • C. Section 5, Paragraph (4) is amended to read as follows: tl�,��ll =1Z l� 1117�SSl LI�l!S�,li4l AA D. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of that portion of the property described in Paragraph B. lying east of the center line of Queen Avenue extended from I to C -2. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of that portion of the property described in Paragraph B. lying west of the center line of Queen Avenue extended from MR to C -2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor (644) M -9 That area lying between the east line of Leslie Terrace Addition and the center line of Penn Avenue; and between the center lines of 62nd and 63rd Streets, • C. Section 5, Paragraph (4) is amended to read as follows: tl�,��ll =1Z l� 1117�SSl LI�l!S�,li4l AA D. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of that portion of the property described in Paragraph B. lying east of the center line of Queen Avenue extended from I to C -2. This amendment constitutes a rezoning of that portion of the property described in Paragraph B. lying west of the center line of Queen Avenue extended from MR to C -2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor F/77 MR • . PLMNING cr-r-r—r—m J J J J r • JJ JJ JJ JJJJ C -2 R �� ZONING meirt DapartrnoM 5 -2 -96 IN REZON G PLAN EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING CROSSTOWN HWY. 62 CROSSTOWN HWY. 62 =•. : •: = = =. •' :•' :•: '...- •' :• :• :•' :• :• •�: : :•: :•: :•: :•:::•: :•: :::::::•: : :•: : :: JJJJJJJJJJJ 7,11, J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJJ JJJJJJJJ JJ JJJJJJJJJJJJJ) JJ JJ JJJJJJ JJJ to Q J J N �/� V/ Y LL :•: : :' :• :• :'.... "' •••••••••••.•. ':1': }.: `: •: •: •'• :•:• W , Q Z Z WA 1•i iY .,j ' Q J J N J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJJJJJJJJJJJ JJ JJ JJ JJ JJ JJJJ JJ JJ JJ JJ JJ JJJJJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJ J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J iii J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J, J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J W Q Z Z W IL "• "'•'• " "': }�•••••• J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJJ J J J J J J J J iii iii J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J JJJJJ JJ JJJJJJ J JJ Q >W Uz >W C� C� 6228 Penn Avenue. F/77 MR • . PLMNING cr-r-r—r—m J J J J r • JJ JJ JJ JJJJ C -2 R �� ZONING meirt DapartrnoM 5 -2 -96 ) 15- - lii ems mu .0-.Ot jjq5s 1w —I t' _ 1 Ci VIOV Gas VwVQw go$ an WAS / 4 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 155 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Approval of the 1996 labor contract reopener provisions with the Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS), Local 123. Background: In 1995, the City Council approved a two -year labor agreement with the Investigator /Agent and Police Officer bargaining unit. The two -year agreement permitted certain provisions to be re- opened and bargained for in 1996. City staff has completed labor negotiations with the LELS, Local 123 on the Labor Agreement reopener provisions for the year 1996, subject to Council approval. LELS, Local 123 represents the positions of Police Officers and Investigator /Agents. There are 34 employees represented in the unit. The tentatively approved settlement includes the following changes effective January 1, 1996: 4 1. WAGES A 2.5% across - the -board increase effective January 1, 1996 and a 1% across -the- board increase effective July 1, 1996. 2. HEALTH INSURANCE A $10 increase from $335 per month to $345 per month for dependent coverage for 1996. 3. LIFE INSURANCE Increasing the coverage from $20,000 to $25,000 per employee. Recommended Motion: Approve the reopener provisions of the Labor Agreement with the LELS, Local 123 and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City has met and negotiated with the Union and is bound under the Public Employers Labor Relations Act to meet and bargain over the terms and conditions of employment. 2. The 1996 wages and insurance portions of the proposed settlement are similar to other City employee groups. The total cost of the settlement increase for 1996 as calculated on the BMS form is 2.51 %. i4 -� Alternative Recommendation: Do not approve the terms of the agreement requiring further negotiation and /or arbitration. Discussion /Decision Mode: In order to allow the City's accounting personnel to modify payroll records in a timely manner for 1996 wages and benefits, it is recommended that the City Council act on May 13, 1996 to adopt the attached resolution providing for contract changes effective January 1, 1996. Respectfully submitted, Ja s D. Prosser City Manager JDP:cak Attachment C] • / q -L-)- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING REOPENER ISSUES OF LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS), LOCAL 123 BARGAINING UNIT FOR THE YEAR 1996 WHEREAS, the City Manager and the Richfield Police Officers Federation have reached an understanding concerning conditions of employment for the year 1996; and WHEREAS, it would be inappropriate to penalize LELS members who have negotiated in good faith; and WHEREAS, the Human Resources Ordinance requires that contracts between the City and the exclusive representative of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit shall be implemented by Council resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Labor Agreement between the City of Richfield and LELS Local 123 Bargaining Unit for the year 1996, under the provisions of the Labor Agreement to be implemented, effective January 1, 1996. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of May, 1996. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 4 jq-3 N l 1 - • 1 1 I 1 0 = 1 N Al ` jI d T 4 © R n � '� `� .•.�. GO ^ O U C = .di• � U 1 C A d A O �- It J N n W '• G "°' O v Z O U 3 I G n n d N O O C q ° a•y'. C 0 0 m >0° roc duo � d �� ov wv •° •7 .•. J O �^ y„ G d° Z 1°�. V i� "� I E O N.d ..'-J M A w q � q � �_ d 4U JD 0 I J P Q w> w•> 3 C y A O d C Z G Z C Z° ZU ...•... ._. I ZU V I P N I Ec cr 'mti.V m co I O a V I CD I •° N q p J V v m � I I .I 1 nl 1 m } VW1 `= y`j J. -+-.'• •% � C1 1 � m M n C � < Q Q % V GO i w C edGP A O . I � d Y .- i W q q N`• d V� I E ZAP ` O_ yN � �� •. ' N r.v d^ �' O G V a Z N R �= O C K O G � • I r� o PO q A G d d^ Y w U w� }� E E q Q d ..—°n V „°� V Y .+ C � I 1 44 to V v o � O I C-1 M p M V — 000 N CD r � MI •DCi7 r.W � r'C � � a `� n'~ d G ^ O V L m mod, y$ I E T d N � � �•- .:C`+I d ro O G� L d ,O' � 7 w X .w C p E e�� } N e O G All '� M V Z U u V I w 7 w i d a •ice n V •'e• I OW J 0 1 I 00 O Q . •j 4 r C U d '� M V d Q O Q � 'J dj u� i!N � W °d M E p� ~ I < 7 N eeeea� -•aa a .� E q m�% I m .• � �. o N C ,,, v° V m� m� m J Z m V O to %3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 154 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amendment relating to Council salaries. Background: Chapter II, Section 210 of the City ordinance establishes the salaries of the City Council and provides that the salaries of the Council Members be reviewed by December 1 of each year in which an election is held. The City Council adopted Council Policy Statement No. 1 on July 13, 1987. The policy statement provides that in years a municipal election is to be held, the Council shall establish a revised pay schedule for Council Members and the Mayor. The policy also provides that the amount of increase granted to employees in the year subsequent to the previous salary adjustment should be used as a guideline. The salary increase for employees in the General Services and Management pay plans for 1996 was 3 %. The last Council salary increase was approved on May 9, 1994, effective January 1, 1995. At the April 1, 1996 Study Session, the City Council requested that a proposed ordinance amendment to increase Council salaries by 3% be prepared for consideration at the April 8, 1996 City Council meeting. First reading of the ordinance amendment was approved on April 8, 1996 and a notice of public hearing was published on April 24, 1996 in the Richfield Sun Current. The 3% increase would adjust the Mayor's 1996 salary to $7,995 per year and Council Member 1996 salaries to $6,206 per year. Recently updated survey information indicates that the 1996 average salaries for Mayor and Council Members are $8,941 and $6,594 respectively. Recommended Motion: Conduct the public hearing and approve second reading of an ordinance amendment to Chapter II, Section 210.01 of the ordinance code to increase the salaries of Council Members from $6,025 to $6,206 per year and the salary of the Mayor from $7,762 to $7,995 per year. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Chapter II, Section 210 of the City ordinance establishes, salaries of the City Council and provides that salaries of Council Members be reviewed by December 1 of each year in which an election is held. • !3 -I 0 2. The City Charter stipulates that Council Member salaries may be adjusted only by ordinance. 3. First reading of the ordinance amendment was approved on April 8, 1996. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Continue discussion of this item to another Council meeting. 2. Propose alternative salary adjustments other than the proposed amount. 3. Do not approve second reading of the ordinance and take no further action. Discussion /Decision Mode: This item has been scheduled for second reading at the May 13, 1996 City Council meeting. If the ordinance is approved, salary increases would become effective in 1996. Respectfully submitted, Jame . Prosser City Manager JDP:cak 1r J 13-a BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 210 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 210 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended by amending Subdivisions 1 and 2 Subsection 210.01 to read as follows: Subdivision 1. Mayor. The salary of the mayor is $7,762 $7.995 per year. Subdivision 2. Council. The salary of a member of the council is $6,925 $6,206 per year. Passed this 13th day of May, 1996 by the Richfield City Council • ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 153 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an interim ordinance authorizing a study to be conducted pertaining to regulating and licensing of tattoo businesses and placing a moratorium on development of such uses within the City. Background: The City licensing ordinances do not contemplate or address the classification of tattoo businesses. Furthermore, the zoning ordinance does not classify where tattoo parlors should be properly located. The City currently has no such uses, however, questions have been raised as to whether the City should license these facilities and also whether the specific zoning designation should be determined. First reading of this interim ordinance was conducted on April 8, 1996 and the public hearing and second reading were scheduled for May 13, 1996. Recommended Motion: Conduct the public hearing and second reading of an interim ordinance authorizing a study to be conducted pertaining to the need for licensing of tattoo businesses and placing a moratorium on development of such uses within the City. . Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Advisory Board of Health will conduct the study to include analysis of the appropriateness of licensing. 2. If the Advisory Board of Health determines that licensing should be required, then the Advisory Board of Health will provide a recommendation regarding appropriate licensing provisions. 3. The Advisory Board of Health will also recommend whether the uses should be restricted in terms of location. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may decide not to authorize a study. 2. The Council may decide not to authorize a moratorium Discussion /Decision Mode: This matter is presented for action at the City Council meeting of May 13, 1996. Respec Ily submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager ORDINANCE NO. AN INTERIM ORDINANCE REGULATING CERTAIN BUSINESS ACTIVITIES AND DIRECTING A STUDY BE CONDUCTED THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background. 1.01. The City of Richfield ( "City ") currently regulates a wide variety of retail and service businesses through official controls or licensing or both. /0-/ 1.02. The City does not currently have in place any official controls which would be directly applicable to businesses engaged in tattooing, body piercing, body painting, body branding or similar activities. 1.03. To the extent that these activities are subject to official controls, it is by relating them to similar businesses which are the specified subjects of the official controls. 1.04. The City Council is concerned that application of its official controls by inference may not be an adequate way to address land use issues presented by the businesses activities described in 1.02. 1.05. There exist a number of significant planning and land use issues pertaining to the protection of health, safety and general welfare of the City, including the following: a) Should these activities be restricted to certain zoning districts of the city, and if so, which ones? b) Should these activities be separated from other activities such as liquor establishments, schools and churches? c) Should the activities be conditional uses in the districts where they are allowed, and if so, what conditions would be appropriate? 1.06. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355 Subd. 4, allows the City to adopt an interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens. Section 2. Findinas. 2.01 The City Council finds that it is necessary to conduct studies to determine if there is a need to amend the City's official controls or its comprehensive plan relating to the uses described in Section 1.02 above, and if so, to adopt the appropriate 'amendments. is -cl�- 2.02. The City Council finds that there is a need to adopt an interim ordinance for the purpose of protecting the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of its citizens regarding such matters. Section 3. Planning and Zoning Study: Moratorium. 3.01. A study is authorized to be conducted by City staff to determine whether the City's official controls need to be modified as they relate to the uses described in Section 1.02 above. 3.02. Pending completion of the study and adoption of any amendments to the City's official controls, it shall be unlawful for any person to establish, expand, or rebuild any of businesses which is engaged in the uses described in Section. 1.02'above. 3.03. Upon application to the City Council, and the showing of an undue hardship, the City Council may grant such waivers to the provisions of this ordinance, and upon such waivers to the provisions of this ordinance, and upon such conditions as the City Council shall, in its sole judgment deem appropriate. Section 5. Enforcement. The City may enforce any provisions of this ordinance by mandamus, injunction or other appropriate civil remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction. Section 6. Term. Unless earlier terminated by action of the City Council, this ordinance shall be effective for one year from its effective date, and may be further extended for such additional periods as the City Council may deem appropriate, not exceeding a total additional period of 18 months. Passed by the City Council this day of , 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 152 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Request for an amended conditional use permit for Academy of the Holy Angels, 6600 Nicollet Avenue, to construct a seasonal sports facility (continued from April 22, 1996). Background: The Academy of the Holy Angels is proposing to construct a seasonal sports facility on its property at 6600 Nicollet Avenue. The neighborhood raised several issues with the proposal at the Planning Commission meeting on March 26, 1996. The Planning Commission recommended that Holy Angels and the neighbors go through mediation to facilitate communication between the two parties. Mediation sessions were held on April 9 and April 16, but the issues were not resolved. Holy Angels agreed to continue discussions with the neighbors. A different mediation center will work with Holy Angels and the neighbors. Three sessions have been scheduled during the month of May. Recommended Motion: Continue consideration of the conditional use permit for the Academy of the Holy Angels, 6600 Nicollet Avenue, to construct a seasonal sports facility to the City Council meeting on June 10, 1996. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Planning Commission requested that the two parties use mediation to communicate about the issues. 2. The first mediation sessions were unsuccessful. Holy Angels would like to continue discussions with the neighbors using a different mediation center before bringing the item back to the Planning Commission. 3. The Planning Commission did not complete its review of the application. The Planning Commission will discuss the item after the mediation has been completed. • Discussion /Decision Mode: The public hearing scheduled for May 13, 1996 will be continued to June 10, 1996. Notice of the hearing on June 10, 1996 will be published in the Sun Current. Property owners within 350 feet will be notified of the hearing on June 10, 1996. submitted, 10 James City Man, JDP:ds IO CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 151 . Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Continuation of public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amending Section 905 Animal Control regarding the licensing of pets. Background: In an effort to streamline cumbersome ordinance requirements, Public Safety staff has identified several areas of the animal control ordinance to amend. Primarily, these areas are regarding the licensing of pets and the clarification of definitions. First reading of this ordinance amendment occurred on April 8, 1996 as a result of several issues that were raised by staff. The public hearing and second reading were originally scheduled for April 22, 1996 but were continued to May 13, 1996 in order to. clarify several questions. One of the additions to this proposed amendment is to clarify the definition of a veterinary kennel and separate it from the commercial kennel definition. This addition better identifies the types of activities that a veterinary kennel provides to the community. The license application process and the fee remain the same for both a veterinary kennel and a commercial kennel license. Currently, pets are licensed annually with proof that the pet has been vaccinated. Annual . pet license fees are $9 for a dog and $8 for a cat. These licenses are due by July 1 of each year and the 2,000 animal licenses are processed in a four to six week period of time. The amendments being proposed would change the process to one in which licenses are issued in conjunction with the length of time their rabies vaccination is valid. Rabies vaccination shots can be valid for a period of one to three years. If an individual, for example, had their pet vaccinated for rabies for a two year period of time, they could obtain a license for two years at an $8 per year fee, provided they could also provide proof that the animal has been neutered or spayed. This is not only a cost reduction in the license fee but a savings of citizens' time. It is feasible that an animal owner may only have to visit City Hall for this license once every three years. This would also spread out staffs time issuing licenses so that pet licensing lines at City Hall should be minimal. A significant aspect of this amendment gives residents the ability to purchase multi -year licenses for their animals with proof of rabies vaccination and proof that their animal has been spayed or neutered. Residents with unneutered or unspayed animals will be unable to purchase a multi -year license. Any unneutered or unspayed animals would need to continue to purchase a one year license at the cost of $12 a year. This proposed fee of $12 is a $3 -4 increase over what residents paid last year but, hopefully, this will result in an incentive for individuals to consider spaying or neutering their pets. This is also viewed 40 as a more responsible approach to dealing with the ever growing number of unwanted dogs and cats. ID-1 This amendment also increases the amount of a late penalty charged if pet owners fail to purchase their licenses by July 1. The late penalty fee currently is $1 per animal and, to staffs knowledge, it has never been increased. Staff proposes that the fee be increased to $5 to assist in encouraging residents to renew the license on time, to assure the community that all animals are licensed in a timely manner and to cover the administrative costs that occur when staff follows -up with telephone calls and letters to those that are late. This amendment would also clarify the section on the need to immediately dispose of feces. The old language referred only to the need to immediately clean up dog feces. Staff proposes changing the word "dog" to "animal" throughout the ordinance to make it clearer that it means both dogs and cats. The only exception to that would be the leashing requirement for dogs that is not intended for cats. Discussions have occurred regarding a leashing requirement for cats and staff believes that enforcement is difficult. Currently, in unleashed cat situations, staff. references a section in Ordinance 905.09 numerous times regarding an animal being a public nuisance which appears to be effective in dealing with some of those types of problems. Recommended Motion: Conduct the public hearing and approve second reading of an ordinance amendment to Section 905, Animal Control, regarding the licensing of pets. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This may result in an added incentive for residents to have their pets neutered or spayed. This is a more responsible approach in dealing with the growing number of unwanted dogs and cats. 2. This should be a much more convenient way for residents to obtain their pet's license. 3. This should spread out the animal licensing function throughout the year which eliminates processing large numbers of licenses in a relatively short period of time. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do nothing and leave the ordinance as it currently is. Discussion /Decision Mode: Conduct the public hearing and approve second reading of an ordinance amendment to Section 905, Animal Control, regarding the licensing of pets. Respec Ily submitted, Jame . Prosser 0 City Manager JDP:ds 10-D- 0 BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 905 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 905 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended as follows: Section 905 - Animal control. 905.01. Licensing of domestic animals. Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this section the terms defined in this subsection have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. "Owner" means any person owning, keeping, harboring or having custody of a dog or- reatan animal. Subd. 3a. "Commercial kennel" means a place where more than two dogs or two cats over six months of age are kept, and where the business of selling, boarding, breeding, showing, heating or grooming dogs or cats is conducted. is Subd. 3b "Veterinary kennel" means a kennel facilitYor clinic operated and maintained by a licensed veterinarian, where treatment. care. diagnosis. and veterinary procedures are performed• Subd. 4. "Residential kennel" means a place where more than two dogs or two cats over six months of age are kept on premises which are zoned and occupied for residential purposes, and where the keeping of such dogs or cats is incidental to the occupancy of the premises for residential purposes. Subd. 5. A dog is "at large" when it is off the property of its owner and not under restraint. Subd. 6. A dog is "under restraint" if it is controlled by a leash not exceeding six feet in length, or at heel beside a competent person having custody of it and obedient to that person's commands, or within a vehicle being driven or parked on a public street or within the property limits of its owner's premises. An unattended dog on the property of another, without the consent of such property owner, is "at large" and not under restraint even though it is on a leash. Subd. For p=oses of • • 905,03-905,33, to domestic does and • 905.03. License. Subdivision 1. General rule. No person may own, harbor, keep or have custody of a- deg- er--eMann animal over six months of ag° within the city, unless a current license for the /c)-3 animal has been obtained as provided in this subsection. Lieenses shall be issued on an afffmal basis and sM1 be made fer- the whele er- une"ir-ed peAien ef the yee& ending en the 30th day-Of June „° * f !1@, 4ag the first °proefive day of the lieense Applications for animal licenses must be made when the animal attains 6 months of age,. (i�., and not later than 30 days from the acQ.uisition of an animal, (ii) and not later than 30 days from lw- moving of an animal into the city. (iiii) this registration will expire on the date the animal's rabies vaccination expires, and must be reinstated within 15 days of the expiration of the animal's rabies vaccination. Owned whose animals have received rabies vaccinations which are effective for more than one year may apply for a two or three year license, depending on the lype of rabies vaccination. When making application for a multi -year license, the owner must submit all of the information reQ.uired for an annual license as well as documentation indicating that the animal has received a rabies vaccination which is effective for the multi -year license being applied for The multi -year license may not exceed the period of effective rabies vaccination stated on the vaccination certificate provided by the veterinary clinic, or veterinarian which vaccinated the animal These multi -year licenses may only be issued for animals which have been spayed or neutered Subd. 2. License fees. The license fee for each , animal license and the charge for a duplicate animal license is as provided in appendix D. Subd. 3. Late penalty. If the animal license is obtained while the animaldeg —or- r. is impounded by the city, or after- 4he required lieseffse period eemme ^ °a, if the 15 day period allowed for reregistration of the animal has expired .there shall be added to the regular license fee a late license penalty as provided in appendix D for each animal; provided that an owner who newly acquires an animal heemse year-, or an owner who has an deg or-e animal at the time of becoming a resident of the city, shall be allowed thirty days to secure a license, without incurring the late license penalty provided in this subdivision. Subd. 4. Contents of application. Application for an animal license shall be made to the rainy eler-k °Y to the perm lic Safety Department. The application shall include such descriptive information as is necessary to provide reasonable identification of the animal ands its owner. Applicants shall provide a certificate issued by a licensed doctor of veterinary medicine showing that the animal has been vaccinated against rabies, aft4-that such vaccination is effective on the date of the application =and that the vaccination will be effective for the period of time for which application for animal license is made. Subd. 5. Identification of licensed animal. Upon the issuance of a- deg -or- -ratan animal license by the city clerk or the city pound keeper, the licensee shall be provided with a mogtallic tag bearing the license number;-md number;-m the word "Richfield-;,." and the year When the 1 ^°^S° pefieA beings or- has begun. Except where the deg -ep -eat ni for which the license is issued is indoors on the premises of his owner, the animal shall have a collar or harness on which the license tag. and current rabies_ tag is affixed. No person may counterfeit any tag of this city or is use a counterfeit tag. / I C)-q Subd. 6. License nontransferable. A license tag is nontransferable to any other animal or to a new owner for- a deg er- ea&_1LMi=LfOr which it is issued. Subd. 7. Replacement of lost tag. If any such tag is lost or stolen, the owner may obtain a new tag by surrendering the receipt for the first tag and by paying the charge for a duplicate license as provided in appendix D. 905.05. Dogs not to be at large--immediale ° disposal of aAQ, &-giagI An owner may not permit a dog to be at large in this city, but shall keep dog under restraint at all times. A deg owner- and a eay feees of the animal, emeept thM this pr-evisien does net apply to blind peFseas -A4th Fespeet uhe ship and , of seeing o degs. •1 1. t • �• • .• �•- •� 11111111111 ' • • • AN M1!41M •• • • • •_ t. �•_� • • • ..� •• - • • 905.07. Confinement when necessary. cmrrrrssrv-ci– f rivcT dangerous or- �6g,— ENCH� 13P .„lea „a „ the fftfei e f . eempetent per-sen. A female dog -er-eM im in heat shall be confined in a building, secure enclosure, veterinary hospital or boarding kennel, or shall be controlled on a leash while being 40 exercised, provided the animal does not create a public nuisance. 905.09. Public nuisances. The keeping of which annoys other persons is a public nuisance and is unlawful. Upon the receipt of a written complaint of such annoyance by the occupants of two or more neighboring properties, the city shall notify the owner of such dog or -ratan animal that the nuisance shall be abated within 48 hours. Failure to obey a notice is a violation of this subsection. 905.11. City 1 ound. The council may provide for a city animal pound either within or outside the limits of the city. 905.13. Pound keeper. If a city pound is established, the manager shall designate the pound keeper who may appoint and deputize special officers to enforce this section. The special officer shall have police powers to cite owners of dogs or cats for violations of this section, to impound dogs E)r- nim and to enforce the provisions of this section. 905.15. Enforcement procedures. Such officers as the manager shall designate to enforce this section may pick up and impound any deg - e-r- catanimal found not to be kept, confined or restrained, or licensed in the manner required by this section. The officers may enter upon private property where there is reasonable cause to believe that e- dog- or- eMamanimal is on the premises and is not licensed as required by this section, or that there is a deg or- sataanimal on the premises which is not being kept, confined o: restrained, as herein provided. An owner shall io-S produce for inspection a- dog n animal license receipt when requested to do so by the officer. 905.17. Quarantine. And deg- eFeatanimal, capable of carrying the rabies virus that has bitten a person shall immediately be impounded for at least ten days and kept apart from other anima-Is living creatures, under the supervision of a veterinarian, or the Department of Public Safety until it is determined whether the animal had or has a disease which might have been transmitted by the bite. The impounding may be done by the owner and need not be at the eity pound of my pound designates by the eity,at his residence, or veterinary facility with the =royal of the Department of Public Safety, but if it is not at the city pound or designated pound, the owner shall notify the pound keeper or director of public safety immediately and shall furnish proof in writing that the animal is being impounded. and shall follow all policies and procedures relating to the quarantine as directed by the Department of Public Safety. Upon the expiration of ten days, if it is determined that the dog -ep-sat ima does not have a disease which might have been transmitted by the bite, he may be released and the pound keeper or director of public safety shall be notified immediately prior to the release by the owner of the dog or- eatanhmd. If the dog - er�animal is impounded at the city pound, it may be reclaimed as hereinafter provided. Any which has been bitten by a rabid alcreature shall be euthanated or impounded and kept in the same manner for a period of six months; provided that if the deg -erg im which has been bitten by a rabid anim 4grtaU= has been vaccinated at least three weeks before the bite and within one year of the bite and if it is again immediately vaccinated, then such animal shall be confined or impounded for a period of forty days before it is released. The owner of an deg-eF- eMMjimal which has been bitten by a rabid aa1 r a shall notify the city pound keeper or director of public safety immediately prior to the release of the deg eFeo im 1. 905.19. Dangerous animals. Adoption by reference. Minnesota Statutes ?" 343.40. 346.57, 347.50. 347.51, 347.52, 347.53. 347.54. and 347.55 as they pertain to domestic animals. are adopted by reference and are as much a 12art of this code as if fully set forth herein. Any violation of the statutes herein adopted by reference is a violation of this code. If all doge satanimal is diseased, vicious, dangerous, rabid or exposed to rabies and the dog - ep-eat nim cannot be impounded after a reasonable effort or cannot be impounded without serious risk to the persons attempting to impound it, or if an dog ep-eataniMaj has made more than one attack on a person or persons, the dog -er• -eAmimal may be immediately killed by or under the direction of an officer authorized to enforce the provisions of this section. 905.21. Treatment during impounding. Any deg- ep- eatanimal which is impounded in the city pound or designated pound shall be kept, with kind treatment and sufficient food and water, and sanitary conditions, for the animal's comfort. If the animal is not known or suspected of being diseased and has not bitten a person or been bitten by a rabid anifn 4ereature, it shall be kept in the pound for at least five days, unless it is sooner reclaimed by its owner. If the animal is known to be or is suspected of being diseased with a disease which might be transmitted to persons, it shall be kept in the pound for at least ten days. 905.23. Redemption of animals. An deg eFeatmimal may be redeemed from the pound by the owner upon paying the following: (a) the license fee for the animal, if the license has not previously been obtained; (b) the late license penalty, where a license has not been obtained within the time provided in this section; (c) the amount of the boarding fee which the city is required to pay to the pound keeper; of n�i (d) an impounding penalty as fixed in appendix D. 905.25. Disposal of unredeemed animals. The city pound keeper or designated pound keeper shall make an effort to contact the owner of any i which has been impounded and which has identification on it. If at the end of the impounding period the deg- eFeatanimal is not reclaimed by the owner, the animal shall be deemed to have been abandoned and may be disposed of or sold to any person following the procedures contained in Minnesota Statutes, section 514.93. If the animal is to be kept in the city, a license shall be obtained before possession of the animal is given to the purchaser, if a license is required. 905.27. Limit of dogs and cats on one premise. Not more than two dogs or cats over six months is of age shall be kept on any one premise, except at a licensed commercial kennel; veterinary kennel. or a licensed residential kennel. 905.29. Abandonment. It is unlawful for any person to abandon any - deg -er• -ether animal in this city, or at the city pound. or designated city pound. 905.31. Kennel licenses. Subdivision 1. Definitions. The terms "commercial kennel;' "veterinary kennel," and "residential kennel" are defined in section 905.01. Subd. 2. License required. No person may operate a veterinary. commercial, or residential kennel in this city without first obtaining a kennel license as provided in this subsection. Application for the license shall be made to the city clerk and must be accompanied by the license fee set by appendix D. The clerk shall refer the application to the council, which may grant or deny the license. Licenses issued for kennels shall be on an annual basis. The council may impose conditions upon the arantina of any residential. veterinary. or commercial kennel license. Subd. 3. Approval of contieguous property owners. The application for a residential kennel license, or commercial kennel license in a residential area, shall be accompanied by a petition showing the approval of the occupants of privately owned real estate abutting the premises on which the kennel is to be located. Whether or not all of the occupants of abutting property approve the application, the council may grant or deny the license. The license may not be granted unless the council finds that the use of the applicant's premises as a residential kennel 1C )--� will not have, or will not be likely to have, any adverse effect upon adjacent properties or the occupancy thereof, and will not constitute a nuisance to the neighborhood. The eounei may Subd. 4. Revocation. Kennel licenses may be revoked by the council by reason of any violation of this subsection or by reason of violation of any other provisions of this code or any order, law or regulation. Subd. 5. Notice and hearing. Before revoking a kennel license, the licensee shall be given notice of the meeting at which such revocation will be considered, and if the licensee is present at such meeting, the licensee must be given an opportunity to be heard. Notice of the meeting shall be given to the licensee in writing. Written notice shall be mailed to the address of the licensee as set forth in the licensee's application for the kennel license, and it shall be mailed at least five days before the date of the meeting at which the revocation is to be considered by the council. Subd. 6. License fees. The fee for a veterinaU or commercial kennel license and the fee for a residential kennel license are as fixed in appendix D. The residential kennel license fee is in addition to the usual animal license fees provided in this section. if applicable. Subd. 7. Sanitation. Kennels shall be maintained in a clean and healthful condition at all times, and shall be open to inspection by the director of public safety, at all reasonable times. • Subd. 8. Reports to city. Each month that a kennel is operated, the owner of the kennel shall report to the city manager, accurately stating in writing the greatest number of animals kept on his kennel premises during the preceding calendar month. Animals kept by a kennel in its capacity as the city pound need not be so reported. 905.33. Reports by hound keep. The city pound keeper or designated pound keeper shall account for and pay over monthly to the city all monies received by him on behalf of the city as license fees or other charges. The pound keeper shall also give an accurate written report each month to the city, stating (i) licenses issued, (ii) fees or other charges collected, (iii) sales made, (iv) dogs, cats and other animals impounded, (v) the duration of any such impoundment, (vi) all animals destroyed, and (vii) other pertinent data relating to animal control which may be requested by the city manager. 905.35. Miscellaneous prohibitions. Subdivision 1. General rule. The existence of any of the conditions enumerated in this subsection are declared to be nuisances and may be proceeded against in the manner provided in section 925. Subd. 2. Swine. No swine of any kind or nature may be kept within the limits of the city at large or in any enclosure situated within a distance of 75 feet from any dwelling house, store or shop of any person other than the owner, nor within 75 feet of any public street in the city. • • Subd. 3. Maintenance of ,grounds for fur - bearing animals. No person may keep mink, foxes, muskrats, raccoons or polecats in yards, pens or houses for breeding purposes in the city. 905.37. Maintenance of fowl and birds. Subdivision 1. Prohibition. No person owning or keeping chickens, ducks, geese, pigeons or other fowl or birds may permit the same to run at large or enter upon the premises of another without permission, nor may any such fowl or birds be kept, raised or permitted to go on any street, park, lake or public ponding area. Subd. 2. Limitation on number. No more than three fowl or birds may be kept or raised on any residential property in the city. This limitation does not apply to the keeping of pigeons pursuant to a license under the provisions of this section. Subd. 3. Injua or annoyance to others. No such fowl or birds may be kept or raised in a manner as to cause injury or annoyance to persons on other property in the vicinity by reason of noise, odor or filth. Subd. 4. Impounding of fowl or birds. A fowl or bird at large in violation of subdivision 1 may be impounded by the city, and, after being impounded for three days or more without being reclaimed by the owner, may be destroyed or sold. A person reclaiming any impounded fowl shall pay the cost of impounding and keeping the same. 905.39. License: ip eons. Subdivision 1. General rule. No person may keep more than three pigeons on any premises in the city without first obtaining a license as provided in this subsection, and no person may keep or harbor pigeons except in compliance with this subdivision. Subd. 2. Definitions. As used in this subsection, the term "pigeon" includes any and all varieties of pigeons. The term "loft" includes any and all quarters in which pigeons are housed. Subd. 3. License application. Application for a license to keep pigeons shall be made to the city clerk and accompanied by the specified license fee. The application shall be investigated by the administrative staff of the city to determine compliance with the ordinances of the city and shall then be referred to the city council, which may grant or deny the license. Licenses shall be issued on an annual basis. The applicant shall seek the written approval of such application by the occupants of all privately -owned real estate abutting the premises for which the license is sought. The approvals which are obtained shall accompany the application. The license application shall include a plan showing the construction of the proposed or existing loft and its location on the property. The loft shall be regarded as an accessory building and shall conform to the building and zoning regulations of the city. The loft shall conform in design with the principal building on the premises. Subd. 4. License fee. The annual license fee is as fixed in appendix D. The license year is from April 1 to March 31. ro-g Subd. 5. Limitation on number. Not more than 25 pigeons may be kept at any one time on any licensed premises. At the time of issuing the license, however, the council may issue a license for a lesser number. It is a violation of this subsection to keep more pigeons on licensed premises than the number authorized in the license. Subd. 6. Other restrictions. Premises on which pigeons are kept and maintained shall be kept reasonably clean from filth, garbage and any substances which attract rodents, at all times. The loft and its surroundings must be cleaned daily. The loft must be constructed and maintained so as to be fly -free and rodent- proof. Pigeons shall be fed within the confines of the loft on the premises on which the pigeons are housed. The pigeons must be confined to the loft except for short periods of exercise during which they may be permitted to fly outside the loft. Grains and food stored for the use of pigeons on any licensed premises shall be kept in rodent -free containers. The loft shall be elevated a minimum of six inches and a maximum of 12 inches above grade to insure freeway beneath the loft. The loft shall rest upon concrete footings and piers, cement blocks or other suitable foundation material. The loft shall have a maximum height of nine feet. Pigeons may not be kept in such a manner as to constitute a nuisance to the occupants of adjacent property. 905.40. Feeding of deer and raccoons prohibited. Subdivision 1. Prohibition. No person shall provide liquids or edible material to deer or raccoons within the boundaries of the city. Subd. 2. Exception. This subsection does not apply to veterinarians, city animal is wardens, or county, state or federal game officials who in their course of their duties have deer or raccoons in their custody or under their management. (Added, Bill No. 1993 -13) 905.41. Maintenance of non - domestic animals, amphibians, reptiles and insects. Subdivision 1. Definition. "Domestic animals" means and includes dogs, cats, birds kept indoors, hamsters, chinchillas, rabbits, lizards and snakes capable of being maintained continuously in cages, caterpillars and other living creatures generally referred to as domestic pets. Subd. 2. Maintenance of non - domestic creatures prohibited. All other living creatures not enumerated or covered in subdivision 1 are considered non - domestic creatures and the maintenance thereof is considered a nuisance and punishable pursuant to this part. Subd. 3. Impounding of non - domestic creatures. Any non - domestic creature kept in violation of subdivision 2 may be impound -d by the city, and, after being so impounded for three days or more without being reclaimed by the owner, may be destroyed or sold. Any person reclaiming the impounded animal shall pay the costs of impounding and keeping the same. Subd. 4. Tempop rary permits. The city manager may grant temporary permits, for a period not to exceed 60 days, for the keeping of any non - domestic animals for use in connection with an exhibition or seasonal display thereof, provided that he finds that such animals are not likely to be dangerous; that they will be kept in safe and sanitary surroundings; that they will not be maintained in an inhumane manner or be subjected to inhumane treatment; and that their presence on the premises will not be a source of nuisance or annoyance to the occupants of adjacent property. In granting the permit, the city manager may impose limitations upon the permit to insure that the animals will be kept under such conditions. No person having a permit to keep animals without maintaining the conditions or abiding by the limitations imposed. A permit shall be subject to immediate suspension by the city manager if the manager determines that the animals constitute a safety or sanitary hazard, are being subjected to inhumane treatment or conditions, or are a source of nuisance. The suspension shall remain in effect until the subsequent meeting of the city council at which the city council may revoke the permit or may reinstate the same subject to such limitations as the council shall deem necessary. Subd. 5. Fees. The permit fee is fixed in appendix D. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1996. Attest: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor TYPE OF PERMIT OR LICENSE (6) General Amusement SECTION REQUIRING FEE >< to -10, 1100.03 (a) Billiard, Pool or Pigeonhole table (each)1 year $32.00 1. Coin operated 1 year 1 year $90.00 (b) Bowling Alley (per lane) 1 year $25.00 (c) Circus 1 year $1,737.00 1 year $129.00 (d) Dance Hall 1 day $129.00 (e) Golf 1. Minature 1 year $30.00 2. Driving Tee 1 year $30.00 (f) Mountback 1 day $124.00 (g) Rides, mechanical or animal ofany kind (each)1 year $19.00 (h) Shows, any kind 1 day $124.00 () Shuffleboard (each lane) 1 year $14.00 Q) Other games 1 day $63.00 (6a) Musical Concert1110.01 Per event $25.00 (7) Theatre Cinema1120 (8) Roller Rink 1115 (9) Commercial Adult -605 Oriented Enterprises (10) Massage Practitioner 605 (11) Public Baths 610 (12) Fortune Teller1130.05- 1130.07 and related trade Plus a notice publication fee 1 year or portion thereof 1 year $124.00 $ 6.50 $124.00 SECTION 6. ANIMAL LICENSES AND PERMITS TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING (1) Animals 905.01- 905.29 (a) - BeeAnimal (b) CatAnimal (c) Duplicate (d) Late Penalty $1,500.00 $50.00 $124.00 $1,737.00 1 day $100.00 1 week $300.00 1 month $600.00 1 year$1,000.00 FEE 1 year(non soaved /neutered) $999$12.00 - 4 yeaFMulti -year per-yea $8.00 E-ith f- deg- epsatAnimal $5.50 Each animal 54- 99$5.00 905.31- 905.33(e) Commercial Kennel 1 year $150.00 (f) Veterinary Kennel 1 year 5150.00 (g#) Residential Kennel 1 year $85-09 905.37- 905.39(hg) Pigeons 1 year $30.00 905.41 (ih) Non - domestic Animals Temporary Permit S20.00 905.01- 905.29Qi) Impounding each Animal 1 st time $25.00 2nd Time $50.00 (& each impound after) (k) Kennel Boarding Fee Each Animal/Per Day S10.00 1 Year $1,500.00 Investigation fee 1 year Certificate fee 1 year Investigation fee 1 year 1 year $1,737.00 Investigation fee (actual cost minimum) SECTION 6. ANIMAL LICENSES AND PERMITS TYPE OF PERMIT SECTION OR LICENSE REQUIRING (1) Animals 905.01- 905.29 (a) - BeeAnimal (b) CatAnimal (c) Duplicate (d) Late Penalty $1,500.00 $50.00 $124.00 $1,737.00 1 day $100.00 1 week $300.00 1 month $600.00 1 year$1,000.00 FEE 1 year(non soaved /neutered) $999$12.00 - 4 yeaFMulti -year per-yea $8.00 E-ith f- deg- epsatAnimal $5.50 Each animal 54- 99$5.00 905.31- 905.33(e) Commercial Kennel 1 year $150.00 (f) Veterinary Kennel 1 year 5150.00 (g#) Residential Kennel 1 year $85-09 905.37- 905.39(hg) Pigeons 1 year $30.00 905.41 (ih) Non - domestic Animals Temporary Permit S20.00 905.01- 905.29Qi) Impounding each Animal 1 st time $25.00 2nd Time $50.00 (& each impound after) (k) Kennel Boarding Fee Each Animal/Per Day S10.00 . CHAPTER 343. PREVENTION OF CRUELTY �l�L CRUELTY TO ANIMALS CILI=ER 343 PREVENTION OF CRUELTY 343.20 Definitions. Subdivision 1. Application. Except as otherwise indicated by the context, for purposes of sections 343.20 to 343.36, the terms defined in this section have the meanin (zs given them. Subd. 2. Animal. "Animal" means every living creature except members of the human race. Subd. 3. Torture; cruelty. "Torture" or "cruelty" means every act, omission, or neclect which causes or permits unnecessary or unjustifiable pain, suffering, or death. Subd. 4. Impure milk. "Impure and unwholesome milk" means all milk CONotained from diseased or unhealthy animals, or from animals fed on anv Wu stance which is putrefied or fermented. Subd. 5. Animal control officer. "Animal control officer" means an officer employed by or under contract with an agency of the state, county, municipality, or other ccvernmental subdivision of the state which is responsible for animal control operations in its jurisdiction. (10442) RL s 5151; 1981 c 53 s 1; 1989 c 37 s 1 0 CHAPTER 343 PREVENTION OF CRUELTY ________________________________ _________________________ -____` 0 343.40 Dog - houses. Subdivision 1. In general. A person in charge or control of any dog which is kept outdoors or in an unheated enclosure shall provide the dog with shelter and bedding as prescribed in this section as a minimum. Subd. 2. Building specifications. The shelter shall include a mciszureprocf and windproof structure of suitable size to accommodate the dog and allow retention of body heat. It shall be made of durable material with a solid floor raised at least two inches from the around and with the entrance covered by a flexible windproof material or a self - closing swinging door. The structure shall be provided with a sufficient quantity of suitable bedding material consisting of hav, straw, cedar shavings, blankets, or the equivalent, to provide insulation and protection against cold and dampness and promote retention of body heat. Subd. 3. Shade. Shade from the direct rays of the sun, during the months of June to September shall be provided. Subd. 4. Farm dogs. In lieu of the requirements of subdivisions 2 and 3, a dog kept on a farm may be provided with access to a barn with a. sufficient quantity of loose hay or bedding to protect against cold and dampness. Subd. S. Zoning. All shelters required by this section shall be Is AWK,1 Sect to all building or zoning regulations of any city, township, lounty, or state. Subd. 6. Penalty. Whoever violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a petty misdemeanor. 1959 c 571 s 2; 1965 c 764 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1981 c 53 s 16 • • CHAPTER 346 STRAY ANIMALS; COMPANION ANIMALS 046.57 Dogs and cats in motor vehicles. Subdivision 1. Unattended dogs or cats. A person may not leave a dog or a cat unattended in a standing or parked motor vehicle in a manner that endangers the dog's or cat's health or safety. Subd. 2. Removal of dogs or cats. A peace officer, as defined in section 626.84, a humane agent, a dog warden, or a volunteer or professional member of a fire or rescue department of a political subdivision may use reasonable force to enter a motor vehicle and remove a doa or cat which has been left in the vehicle in violation of subdivision 1. P_ person removing a dog or a cat under this subdivision shall use reasonable means to contact the owner of the dog or cat to arrange for its return home. If the person is unable to contact the owner, the person may take the dog or cat to an animal shelter. Subd. 3. Petty misdemeanor. A person who violates subdivision 1 is subject to a fine of $25. 1988 c 711 s 6 n i CHAPTER 347 ' DOGS AND CATS REGULATION OF DANGEROUS DOGS CHAPTER 347 DOGS AND CZ1TS 347.50 Definitions. Subdivision 1. Terms. For the purpose Of sections 347.50 to 347.54, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. Dangerous dog. "Dangerous dog" means any dog that has: (1) without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being an public or private property; (2) killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's property; or T (3) been found to be potentially dangerous, and after the owner has -tacks, that the dog is potentially dangerous, the dog aggressively bites, - tacks, or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals. Subd. 3. Potentially dangerous dog. "Potentially dangerous dog" means any dog that: (1) when unprovoked, inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property; (2) when unprovoked, chases or approaches a person, including a person on a bicycle, upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public or private prcpertv, other than the dog owner's property, in an apparent attitude of attack; or (3) has a known propensity, tendencv, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. Subd. ? Pro -oer enclosure. "Proper enclosure" means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure suitable to prevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the dog. A proper enclosure does not include a porch, patio, Or anv part cf a house, garaae, Or other structure that wcul d allow the dog to e. {i = of its own volition, or any house or in i wh =ch Windows are Open or in which door cr window screens are the only obstacles that prevent the 409 frOm e-%i t4 Subd. 5. Owner. "Owner" means any person, firm, corporation, organization, or department possessing, harboring, keeping; having an interest in, or having care, custody, or control of a deg Subd. 6. Substantial bodily harm. "Substantial bodily harm" has the • meaning given it under section 609.02, subdivision 7a. Subd. 7. Animal control authority. "Animal control authority" means an agency of the state, county, municipality, or other governmental subdivision of the state which is responsible for animal control Operations in its jurisdiction. 1988 c 711 s 1; 19810 c 37 s 3 -5; 1994 c 550 s 1 CEUTER 3 4 7 DOGS AM CATS 347.51 Dangerous dogs; registration. Subdivision 1. Requirement. No person may own a dangerous dog in this state unless the dog is registered as provided in this section. Subd. 2. Registration. A county shall issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: (1) a proper enclosure exists for the dangerous dog and a posting on the premises with a clearly visible warning sign, including a warning symbol to inform children, that there is a dangerous dog on the property; Wd (2) a surety bond issued by a surety company authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the county in the sum of at least $50,000, payable to any person injured by the dangerous dog, or a policy of liability insurance issued by an insurance company authorized to conduct business in this state_ in the amount of at least $50,000, insuring the owner for any personal injuries inflicted by the dangerous dog. Subd. 2a. Warr4ng s:,. ,bol. I= a county issues a certificate of registration to the owner of a dangerous dog pursuant to subdivision 2, the county must provide, for posting on the owner's property, a copy of a warning symbol to inform children that there is a dangerous dog on the property. The design cf the warning symbol must be uniform and specifies. by the commissioner of public sa =ety, after consultation with animal control professionals. The design specification process is exempt from rulemakina under chapter 14 and is exempt from section 14.38. The commissioner shall provide the number of copies of the warning symbol reuu.ested by each county and shall charge the county the actual cost of the warning svmbcls received. The county may charge the registrant a reasonable fee to cover its admi:listrative costs and the cost of the warning svmbol. Subd. 3. Fee. The ccunt'i may charge the Owner an annual fee, in addition to arty reC_ular dcC liens ==ig fees, t0 Cbtain a certificate O Wistration for a dangerous doa under this section. Subd. 4. Law enforcC7.ment; exemption. The provisions of this section do not apply to dangerous dogs used by law enforcement officials for police work. • Subd. S. Exemption. Dogs may not be declared dangerous if the threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person: (1) who was committing, at the time, a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of the dog; 0 (2) who was provoking, tormenting, abusing, or assaultinc the doc or who can be shown to have repeatedly, in the past, provoked, tormentea, abused, or assaulted the dog; or (3) who was committing or attempting to commit a crime. Subd. 6. Counties without licensing systems. If an owner of a dangerous dog resides in a county that does not license dccs under sections 347.08 to 347.21, the owner shall obtain a certif1cate as recuired under this section from the county auditor or other person designated by the county board in the county where the owner resides. Subd. 7. Tag. A dangerous dog registered under this section must have a standardized, easily identifiable tag identifying the dog as dangerous and containing the uniform dangerous dog symbol, affixed to the dog's collar at all times. The commissioner of public safety, after consultation with animal control professionals, shall provide by rule for the design of the tag. Subd. 8. Local ordinances. A statutory or home rule charter city, or a county, may not adopt an ordinance regulating dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs based solely on the specific breed of the dog. Ordinances inconsistent with this subdivision are void. Subd. 9. Contracted services. A county may contract with another Wlitical subdivision or other person to provide the services required der sections 347.50 to 347.54. 1988 c 711 s 2; 1989 c 37 s 6 -10; 1991 c 195 s 1; 1994 c 550 s 2 C_-AI TER 3147 DOGS AND CATS 347.52 Dangerous dogs; r=_cuirements. An owner of a dangerous dcg shal 1 keep the dangerous dog, while on the owner's property, in a proper enclosure. If the dog is outside the proper enclosure, the doc must be muzzled and restrained by a,substantial chain or leash and under the physical restraint'of a r= sponsible person. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will prevent the dcg from biting anv person or animal but that will not cause injury to the a-cc or interfere with its vision or respiration. 1988 c 711 s 3 DOGS AND CATS /C)-/g 347.53 Potentially dangerous dogs. 0 Any statutory or home rule charter city, or any county, may regulate potentially dangerous dogs. Except as provided in section 347.51, subdivision 8, nothing in sections 347.50 to 347.54 limits any restrictions the local jurisdictions may place on owners of potentially dangerous dogs. 198'8 c 711 s 4; 1989 c 37 s 11 CHAPTER 347 DOGS AND CATS 347.54 Confiscation. Subdivision 1. Seizure. (a) The animal control authority having jurisdiction shall immediately seize any dangerous dog if: (1) after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is dangerous, the dog is not validly registered under section 347.51; (2) after 14 days after the owner has notice that the dog is dangerous, the owner does not secure the proper liability insurance or surety coverage as required under section 347.51, subdivision 2; (3) the doa is not maintained in the proper enclosure; or (4) the dog is outside the proper enclosure and not under physical restraint of a responsible person as required under section 347.52. (b) if an owner of a dcg is convicted of a crime for which the dog was crici_nally seized, the court may order that the dog be confiscated and destroyed in a proper and humane manner, and that the owner pay the costs incurred in confiscating, confining, and destroying the dog. Subd. 2. Reclaimed. A dangerous dog seized under subdivision 1 may be reclaimed bv_ the owner of the dog upon payment of impounding and boarding fees, and presenting proof to the appropriate animal control authority that the requirements of sections 347.51 and 347.52 will be met. A doa not reclaimed under this subdivision within seven days may be disposed of as provided under section 35.71, subdivision 3, and the owner iS liable to the animal Control authority for costs incurred ].n CCnfinina and d_spcsing cf the dcg. cubd. 3. SL'bSequent offenses; seizure. If a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a provision of section 347.51 or W 7.52, and the person is charged with a subsequent violation relating to e same dog, the dog must be seized by the animal control authority having jurisdiction. If the owner is convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized, the court shall order that the dog be destroyed in a proper and humane manner and the owner pay the cost of confining and destroying the animal. If the person is not convicted of the crime for -acs which seized, e dog was seized, the owner may reclaim the dog upon payment tom the animal control authority of a fee for the care and boarding of the dog. If the dog is not reclaimed by the owner within seven days after the owner has been notified that the dog may be reclaimed, the dog may be disposed of as provided under section 35.71, subdivision 3, and the owner s liable to the animal control authority for the costs incurred in �onfining, impounding, and disposing of the dog. 1988 c 711 s 5; 1989 c 37 s 12 CHAPTER 347 DOGS AND CATS 347.55 Penalty. Any person who violates any provision of section 347.51 or 347.52 is guilty of a misdemeanor. 1988 c 711 s 7 CHAPTER 346 STRAY ANIMALS; COMPANION ANIMALS ESTRAYS 346.01 Who may take uv' / mu No person shaY7. take up any e ay, except hors s�or mules, unless such es- shall be four_d on lands owned or occu -=c by the Berson in the town wherein the person resides. (7257) RL s 276 0,; 1986 gal j ' CFA? PTER 346 StR Y ANIK'a -LS ; COMPANION ANIMA-- ESTRAYS '6.01 Who may take uv. 0 No person shall take up any estray, except horses or mules, unless such estrav shall be found on lands owned or occupied by the person in • • RO CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. iso Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Approval of contract for a new rotary mower to be used at Rich Acres Golf Course. Background: Unit #9, a 1964 Toro Parkmaster 7 -gang reel mower assigned to Rich Acres Golf Course, was replaced in 1991 with a more maneuverable 5 -gang fairway reel mower. Because of its minimal salvage value, Unit #9 was not traded in, but kept for a spare mower and used on "rough" areas. Unit #34, a 1984 7 -gang reel mower, is due to be replaced in 1997. This mower has also been used for "rough" areas over the years. New OSHA safety specifications for these mowers require them to have Rollover Protection Systems (ROPS) installed if they are to be used on anything but flat terrain. Unit #9 is so old that ROPS are not available. ROPS for Unit #34 would cost $4,000. Instead of retrofitting a machine which is so close to being fully depreciated, staff decided replacement should be moved up one year, to 1996. If Unit #9 could be traded in, Unit #34 could be kept as a spare and delegated to mowing only the driving range, which is flat terrain. Staff- written specifications included a trade -in price on the old Unit #9 mower, plus options for a leaf mulcher and full vision cab with wipers. Three vendors received specifications for the new unit: only one submitted a bid, which was opened on April 26, 1996 with the following result: Base Trade -In MTI Distributing Co. $29,743.00 ($2,500) Option "A" Option "B" Grand Total The option quotes included sales tax. Options Total w /Sales Tax $29,013.80 $ 669.00 $4,913.00 $34,595.80 Recommended Motion: Approve a purchase order to MTI Distributing Co. for a new rotary mower to be used at Rich Acres Golf Course in the amount of $29,743.00 minus ($2,500) for the trade -in of Unit 9, plus both options for a grand total of $34,595.80. I'M we Basis of Recommendation: 1. MTI Distributing Company submitted a bid lower than the staff expectation of $40,000. 2. Adequate funds are available to make this purchase possible at this time. 3. It is more cost - effective to purchase a new unit than to spend funds on a unit that is due to be traded in one year. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could reject MTI Distributing Company's bid and instruct staff to obtain new bids; however, the three major manufacturers of this type of vehicle were sent specs, and chose not to bid. Staff does not believe a better price can be obtained for the type of unit desired. Discussion /Decision Mode: This item appears on the May 13, 1996 Council agenda. Staff is requesting approval at this time in order to facilitate timely delivery of the new unit by the OSHA deadline. Respectfully submitted, is Jams . Prosser City Manager JDP:cak CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 26, 1996 10:30 a.m. One New Rotary Mower Bid No. 96 -8 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 one new rotary mower, Bid No. 96 -8, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 17, 1996. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steve Devich, Administrative Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative Roxi Braa, Administrative Aide The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR I Bid Base Bid Options Security MTI Distributing Co. 5% $29,013.80 A - $669.00 Plymouth Bid Bond B - $4,913.00 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 13, 1996 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk Q L CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 149 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Consideration of compensation settlement for partial taking, House of Prayer Lutheran Church; 77th Street project. Background: As of May 17, 1994, the 77th Street project made a partial taking of a portion of the site of House of Prayer Lutheran Church at 7625 Chicago Avenue. This parcel was approximately 265 feet wide (Elliot to Chicago Avenue) and approximately 53 feet deep or some 14,273 square feet. The church asserted that while this was an unimproved portion of their site (grass and trees only) it would make the planned future expansion of their facility unlikely. The offer from the 77th Street project to the church in 1994 was $110,000. A second appraiser retained by the project valued the taking at $117,750. The church's appraiser valued the taking at $665,000. The court appointed commissioners concluded a valuation of $300,000. Either party may appeal the award. However, Robert Lindall from Kennedy & Graven has recommended that the award not be appealed. The church's attorney has agreed not to appeal if the final settlement is at $350,000. Included in this settlement is $22,000 of interest calculated from the date of taking in May 1994 to the date of the commissioners award, April 1996. They are also entitled to $500 under the acquisition rules to offset the appraisal fee. The balance of $27,500 the church is willing to accept in return for not appealing the award. Recommended Motion: Approve the payment of $350,000 as settlement of all claims related to the partial taking of property from the House of Prayer Lutheran Church against the 77th Street project. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The abc•ve settlement is recommended by Robert Lindall the attorney from Kennedy & Graven who is responsible for condemnation actions on the 77th Street project. 2. The decision of the condemnation commissioners could be appealed but Mr. Lindall does not recommend it. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Delay action. 2. Propose an alternative. CL 0 I Discussion /Decision Mode: A response must be given to the attorney for the church in a timely manner. Respectfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds is r • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 148 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Application for lawful gambling license for Fred Babcock VFW Post #5555, located at 710 Lake Shore Drive. Background: On April 5, 1996, the VFW submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license. The application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations. The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Sundays, Mondays and Thursdays from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. The pulltabs would be conducted in conjunction with the bingo operation. The Public Safety Department has conducted the required background investigation . and has determined that the applicant has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling manager, Mr. Charles Thyr, has no known criminal record. • Finally, the applicant is requesting the $100 investigation fee be waived. Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department to review the request for the gambling license and make its review and recommendation to the City Council. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving the gambling license requested by the Fred Babcock VFW Post #5555, 710 Lake Shore Drive, in accordance with Richfield City Code 1100. 13, Subd. 6. Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation fee. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City Code pertaining to lawful gambling. 2. The applicants has submitted the request within 60 days of the renewal of the license. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity requested is a benefit to the community. • Alternative Recommendation: q8- I 0 1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving the renewal request; however, staff has determined that there is no basis for this alternative. 2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee. Discussion /Decision Mode: Approve the renewal of Fred Babcock Post #5555 VFW's lawful gambling application and a request for waiver of the investigative fee. Respectfu submitted, James . Prosser City Manager JDP:ds 0 i. • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR THE FRED BABCOCK VFW POST #5555 TO CONDUCT LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, the Fred Babcock VFW Post #5555 has submitted an application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and WHEREAS, the application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab operations; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides authority for review of applications by local authorities; and WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City Code provides for regulation of lawful gambling; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an investigation of the application and finds the application to be in order. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council, City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Fred Babcock VFW Post #5555, 710 Lake Shore Drive. 2. That the investigation fee be waived. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of May, 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor qP CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 147 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Authorization to execute a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County to continue participation in the Community Development Block Grant program (CDBG). Background: The Joint Cooperation Agreement was executed in 1993 with Hennepin County and 43 other communities to continue the Urban Hennepin County CDBG program. To continue the program, it is necessary to execute a new agreement for the next three years. The agreement is for the federal fiscal years 1997 -1999. The agreement is necessary for the County to qualify as an Urban County and participate in the program. An agreement is also necessary to allow Richfield to continue to receive approximately $250,000 a year from this program. If the City Council elects not to execute this agreement, Richfield cannot participate in the program for the next three years. The new agreement is similar to the one previously executed in 1993. Attached is a copy of the new agreement which highlights the changes from the previous agreement. The most significant changes which do not affect Richfield are the pooling of funds for communities receiving annual planning allocations of less than $50,000 and the elimination of programmatic requirements which are repeated in the annual subrecipient agreements. Recommended Motion: Adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Joint Cooperation Agreement with Henenpin County to continue participation in the CDBG program. Basis of Recommendation: This is a valuable program to the City of Richfield as it provides annual funding for: 1. Housing Improvements • Rehab of Private Property • Scattered Site /New Home Program 2. Removal of Architectural Barriers • City Hall Improvements 3. Public Services • H.O.M.E. • G.M.D.C.A. Child Day Care • CASH qP-I Alternative Recommendation: Do not execute the agreement which would result in the loss of CDBG funds for the next three years. Discussion /Decision Mode: A decision on this matter is necessary at the May 13, 1996 Council meeting to permit processing and submission to Hennepin County by May 31, 1996. Respectfuily submitted, James . Prosser City Manager JDP:ds is 0 9A �- RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement for purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs; and WHEREAS, the City and County wish to execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement in order to continue to qualify as an Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the current Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and the County be terminated and a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and County be executed effective October 1, 1996, that the Mayor and the City Manager be authorized and directed to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 13th day of May, 1996. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor 4 Contract No. JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM tl IPa THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the CC+,�� T . OF HENNER-N, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," A -2400 Government Centel; Mtnti olis, Mm esota, 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each hereinafter respectively referrii "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental �un is of the Staten snnesota, and made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59: a WITNESSETH ,... COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree thatt tsdesirable andtny = fie interests of their citizens that COOPERATING UNIT shares its authority to carry�o f`essentii l- commumtyTdevelopment and housing activities with COUNTY in order to permit COUNTY to,�secure and "admuusteix C'ommunity Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership funds as an Urban County withur the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual,.covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms arid-conditions. • COOPERATIN'G� UNIT acknowledges that "b - thevexecution of this Agreement that it understands that it:� 4111, N , M4 N 1. Mayni5tso app r, giaiats under the State CDBG Program from appropriations for fiscal -j" " urmg whtcl Cis participating in the Urban County Program; and $Y 2 May not partieipap-in a HOME Consortium except through the Urban County. All I. DEFINITIONS Th efitutions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR §570.3 of the Regulations are incorporath _bre�ence and made a part hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the s � , meanings A. "Act" means Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). B. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. D. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County that has entered into a cooperation agreement that is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin County, which is a party to each Agreement. op-4 �� „ *:: E. ::..:: >iti €atee€`?h_ means the document bearing that title or similarly r "equired statements or documents submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the annual grant amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunction with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant program. F. "Metropolitan City" means any city located in whole or in part in Hennepin County which is certified by HUD to have a population of 50,000 or more people. H. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and authorizes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities for the benefit of eligible recipients who reside within the corporate limits of the COOPERATING UNIT which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grant and HOME appropriations for the Federal Fiscal Years 19947, 19958. and 19969 and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. III. AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing �n €;tbi~r19G and terminating no sooner than the end of the program year covered by the gt + nt e f Qbjeet ,es and pr-ejeetea Use of F..nds tslil?li for the basic grant amount for the Fiscal Year 19969, as authorized by HUD, and for such additional time ..as may be required for the expenditure of funds granted to the County for such period. COUNTY sM4 # notify COOPERATING UNIT prior to the end of the Urban County qualification period that the Agreement will automatically be renewed unless it is terminated in writing by either party. Either COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT may exercise the option to terminate the Agreement at the end of the Urban County qualification period. If COUNTY or COOPERATING UNIT fail to exercise that option, it will not have the opportunity to exercise that option until the end of a subsequent Urban County qualification period. COUNTY will notify the COOPERATING UNIT in writing of its right to elect to be excluded by the date specified by HUD. in the r T.-ba G,.unt , Quali -fie .tier rNeti e for- the ft v* „ alifi *ion period. This Agreement must be amended by written agreement of all parties to incorporate any changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in the Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for the year in which the next qualification of the County is scheduled. Failure by either party to adopt such an amendment to the Agreement shall automatically terminate the Agreement following the expenditure of all CDBG and HOME funds allocated for use in COOPERATING UNIT's jurisdiction. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agreement may be terminated at the end of the program period during which HUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing bodies, and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly by the COOPERATING UNIT in the Hennepin County Office of Planning and Development, and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than 199 . 9A_5' COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall take all actions necessary to assure compliance with the applicant's certifications required by Section 104(b) of the Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Fair Housing Act, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974; The Amer-ieans With Disabilities A,.+ of 4990; and other applicable laws. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to undertake and carry out within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable requirements of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and /or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsibility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Statement ef Gbieetives a n _f_a rrS_ Of pursuant to 24 CFR §57$3$8 COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follows: A. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY- established schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, an annual requests for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Urban Hennepin County iEsz3. B. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that, pursuant to 24 CFR §570.501 (b), it is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including the requirement for a written Subrecipient Agreement set forth in 24 CFR §570.503. The Subrecipient Agreement will cover the implementation requirements for each activity funded pursuant to this Agreement and shall be duly executed with and in a form prescribed by COUNTY. C. COOPERATING UNIT acknowledges that it is subject to the same subrecipient requirements stated in paragraph B above in instances where an agency other than itself is undertaking an activity pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. In such instances a written Third Party Agreement shall be duly executed between the agency and COOPERATING UNIT in a form prescribed by COUNTY. D. COOPERATING UNIT shall implement all activities funded for each annual program pursuant to this Agreement within Eighteen (18) Twenty -Four (24) months of the authorization by HUD to expend the basic grant amount. Funds for all activities not implemented within Eighteen (19). Twenty -Four (24) months shall be added to the + annual basir. grant fft e e yed 4,s�1'(,r, iq: ( and aile a L Is 2. Implementation period extensions may be granted upon request in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and /or subject of a binding contract to proceed. RMIZ to E. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to asssI accomplishing the community development program and housing wee goals, as contained in the 'Urban Hennepin County Gempr nvnsive Reusing .FF ...aabil:+„ Stffittvegy (19 F. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and /or activities funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall, in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount comply, with all applicable Federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. G. COOPERATING UNIT that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes action by COUNTY to comply with its fair housing certification shall be sl prohibited from receiving CDBG funding for any activities. H. COOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established by COUNTY in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. COOPERATING UNIT shall eemply with all of the ad e t �e ee ,.ln,� .......... ...... ......: new in J. COOPERATING UNIT shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. K. COOPERATING UNIT has adopted and is enforcing: A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in nonviolent civil rights demonstrations; and A policy of enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of such nonviolent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction. 4 9H -7 COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: A. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies, on an annual basis, all plans, statements and program documents necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. B. COUNTY shall provide, to the maximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of t-he request for funding. C. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing assistane goals. D. COUNTY shall, upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive Twelve percent (12 %) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with the administration of COOPERATING UNIT activity. E. COUNTY may, at its discretion and upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT, agree to administer for a possible fee other programs and/or activities funded pursuant to this Agreement on behalf of COOPERATING UNIT. F. COUNTY may, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules consistent with the Act, Regulations, HUD administrative directives, and administrative requirements of COUNTY. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under Section 106 of the Act shall be allocated as follows: A. COUNTY shall retain Ten percent (10 %) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities. B. The balance of the basic grant amount shall be appei4iexed€<`aI;le by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordance with the formula stated in part C r1rcrs<afiel Itiaof this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to e ;ydIi t requests. `" of f,nar, ..o app.,:4_. fied. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. C. 1 >?Sr ll z J l t ~ each COOPERATING UNIT will ,. ^ °.get for- pl yeses, an amount that bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The population of COOPERATING UNIT and the population of all COOPERATING UNITS. 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 5 • r I 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERATING UNITS. 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be counted twice. E. for- alleeatien of &ads as e c fth in 24 (;FR §570.4-. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by IUD. The COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. F. In the event COOPERATING UNIT does not request its plug -' allocation, or a portion thereof, the amount not requested shall be added te the &A annual basic R Mt e "+ raeaditiefis ef this Agreement. VI. FINANCIAL MATTERS A. Reimbursement to the COOPERATING UNIT for expenditures for the implementation of activities funded under the Act shall be made upon receipt by the COUNTY of Summary of Project Disbursement form and Hennepin County Warrant Request, and supporting documentation. B. All funds received by COUNTY under the Act as reimbursement for payment to COOPERATING UNITS for expenditure of local funds for activities funded under the Act shall be deposited in the County Treasury. C. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in accordance with requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit reports required of the County to be prepared therefrom and to permit the tracing of grant funds and program income to final expenditure. D. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree to make available all records and accounts with respect to matters covered by this Agreement at all reasonable times to their respective personnel S� and duly authorized federal officials. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than three years from the last receipt of program income resulting from activity implementation. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall perform all audits, as may be required, of the basic grant amount and resulting program income as required under the Act and Regulations. E. COOPERATING UNIT shall inform COUNTY of any income generated by the expenditure of CDBG funds it has received and shall pay to COUNTY all program income generated except as derived from activities with an approved revolving account. When program income is generated by an activity that is only partially assisted with CDBG funds, the income shall be prorated to reflect the percentage of CDBG funds used. 1. COUNTY will retain Ten percent (10 %) of all program income paid to COUNTY to defray administration expenses. 2. The remaining Ninety percent (90 %) of the program income paid to COUNTY shall be credited to the grant authority of COOPERATING UNIT whose project generated the program income and shall be used for fundable and eligible CDBG activities consistent with this Agreement. �araTftl D11 ft DMAR N INFREM 1. rMaral 21.1is r _1 1■ . _ . M a a MOMM 1. AN 1. r _ 1, r - 1. r ■ • 1"MAM 1. 1 9A -lo =Offiw LJ C VIII. METROPOLITAN CITIES Any metropolitan city executing this Agreement shall defer their entitlement status and become part of Urban Hennepin County. IX. OPINION OF COUNSEL The undersigned, on behalf of the Hennepin County Attorney, having reviewed this Agreement, hereby opines that the terms and provisions of the Agreement are fully authorized under State and local law and that the Agreement provides full legal authority for COUNTY to undertake or assist in undertaking essential community development and housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing. Assistant County Attorney X. HENNEPIN COUNTY EXECUTION The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper County official having signed this Agreement, the COUNTY agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA Agreement will be legally valid and binding. By: Chair of its County Board And: Deputy /Associate County Administrator Assistant County Attorney Attest: Date: Deputy County Auditor APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Date: • 9 9P -/ a. . XI. COOP19AATING UNIT EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the COOPERATING UNIT'S governing body having duly approved this Agreement on , 199 , and pursuant to such approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, COOPERATING UNIT agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Joint Cooperation Agreement, contract • U: \COOPAGRE.97\ITCOOP.AGR April 23, 1996 0 CITY OF By: Its And: _ Its Date: CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: 10 Plan A Plan B Charter 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 146 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Proclamation designating Washington Park as a registered Peace Site. Background: In cooperation with the staff of Centennial Elementary School, Richfield's leisure services staff has planned a joint Grand Opening and Peace Site celebration for Saturday, May 18, 1996 at Washington Park in the vicinity of 76th Street and 18th Avenue. This event has been registered with World Citizen, Inc., the organization which officially registers Peace Sites. A registered Peace Site is a place where people are involved and committed to: • Protecting the environment. • Promoting intercultural understanding and celebrating cultural differences. • Seeking peace within themselves and relationships with others. • Reaching out in service to others. • Working towards world law with justice. 0 These statements ft within the overall philosophy of people participating in our parks. Recommended Motion: Approve an official proclamation by the Mayor designating Washington Park as an official Peace Site. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City of Richfield believes in and practices the ideals of protecting the environment, promoting intercultural understanding, provision of service and other objectives related to the World Citizen, Inc. mission. 2. The City of Richfield park system affords an opportunity for people to seek peace within themselves, promote relationships with others, and participate as an individual or as a unit. 3. Washington Park, as the newest redeveloped park in the Richfield park system, is an ideal site to serve as a Peace Site. 4. The City of Richfield and the Richfield School District have long worked together, have much to be proud of in their service to constituents, provide a high level of aesthetics in the community, promote understanding between all people, and take seriously the commitment to protect the environment. The joint Grand Opening and Peace Site celebration planned for Saturday, May 18 from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., with a ceremony at 3 p.m., exemplifies this cooperative effort. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not designate Washington Park nor any other site in the City as a Peace Site. 2. Select a different site to be designated as a Peace Site. 3. Proclaim more than one park or all parks in the Richfield park system to be Peace Sites. Discussion /Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the May 13, 1996 Council meeting. Leisure Services Coordinator Gretchen Blank will be present to accept the proclamation. Respec ully submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager 0 JDP:ds MW CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 145 Agenda May 13, 1996 Issue Statement: Accept the Concrete Paving Association of Minnesota award for 77th Street. Background: The Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Concrete Paving Association of Minnesota selected the City of Richfield as recipient of a Merit Award for Outstanding Performance. The award is in recognition of the high quality concrete pavement construction performed on 77th Street between Portland Avenue and Cedar Avenue. This project in the City of Richfield was rated the best project of its type completed in Minnesota in 1995. Recommended Motion: Accept the award from the Concrete Paving Association of Minnesota for outstanding concrete pavement construction on 77th Street in the City of Richfield. Basis of Recommendation: Richfield's 77th Street project is outstanding in its timing and construction. The Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Concrete Paving Association of Minnesota wish to acknowledge this project with a merit award for outstanding performance. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion /Decision Mode: . Mr. Dan Frentress, Executive Director of the Concrete Paving Association of Minnesota, will be in attendance to present the award. This item is scheduled for the May 13, 1996 Council meeting. Respectfu submitted, James Prosser City Manager JDP:ds