01-17-95 agenda(' _ ,
L~~~-=,,
CITY OF RICHFIELD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1995
REGULAR HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR HRA MEETING OF DECEMBER 19, 1994
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE HRA ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA-
2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS FOR HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FOR 1995
HRA LETTER NO. 1
3. DESIGNATION OF ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR 1995
HRA LETTER NO. 2
4. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES FOR HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR 1995
HRA LETTER NO. 3
5. DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1995
HRA LETTER NO .4
6. DISCUSSION OF RELOCATION STATUS REPORT FOR CSM PHASE II
BUSINESSES
HRA LETTER NO. 5
7. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR VO-TECH PROJECT RELATED
ACTIONS AND UPDATE ON 7101 FIRST AVENUE, 7021 NICOLLET AVENUE
.AND REMAINING ONGOING PROJECTS
HRA LETTERNO. 6
8. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
SALE OF 6634 FOURTH AVENUE
HRA LETTER NO. 7
9. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORT
10. CLAIMS AND PAYROLL
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.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 7
Agenda January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Public hearing and sale of 6634 Fourth Avenue and the announcement of an open
house for community leaders.
Background:
The construction project at 6634 Fourth Avenue was authorized by the HRA in March
1993 as a cooperative project with Hennepin Technical College. The project is
completed and a sale is anticipated on January 26, 1995. Prior to the HRA meeting
from 4 to 7 p.m. on Tuesday, January 17, the house will be open and staffed for
viewing.
A four member, income qualified family previously displaced from their apartment on
77th Street due to the right-of--way expansion has been selected as purchaser. They
meet all the requirements stated in Attachment A. HRA authorization to sell the
property is required prior to final processing. The home is being sold for $110,000.
The purchasers are making a down payment of $14,000. They have applied for a
conventional mortgage in the amount of $75,000. The difference between the initial
- purchase price and the estimated market value, $21,000, is provided as a second
mortgage by the HRA. Project costs are covered by the down payment and first
mortgage. The second mortgage serves to make the initial purchase price affordable,
and to prevent a speculative purchase in which the buyer might benefit from selling the
home quickly.
Funds received when the second mortgage is repaid are returned to the New Home
Program for financing other housing activities of the HRA. The HRA will pay two points
for mortgage discounting (approximately $1,500) and the cost of title insurance
(approximately $200) at closing. After closing, the Hennepin Technical College contract
of $77,720 will be paid. These costs have been anticipated in the 1995 budget and will
be paid by the proceeds of sale.
If at any time during final processing the family is found ineligible by the lender, the
purchase agreement is void and earnest money released. At this time, however, the
lender has qualified the purchaser through the preliminary processing.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that following the public hearing, the HRA adopt the attached
resolution which authorizes the disposition of the HRA owned property at 6634 Fourth
Avenue.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Aqualified.-family has been identified as a purchaser-and meets program
requirements.
2. A purchase agreement cannot be processed further by the lender without HRA
authorization of sale.
3. A public hearing notice has been published in the Sun-Current which allows the
HRA to consider the sale at the March meeting.
4. It has been determined that the sale for residential purposes is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
Alternative Recommendation:
Do not adopt the resolution. However, this would cause a delay in the sale of the
property, be very confusing to the buyer, and would increase HRA holding costs.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Authorization of the sale is required at the January 17 meeting so that the buyers can
finalize mortgage financing for a prompt closing.
Resp ly submitted,
James Prosser
Executive Director
JDP:cak
RESOLUTION NO.
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL
PROPERTY LOCATED AT
6634 FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA), owns certain real
property located at 6634 Fourth Avenue, legally described as: Lot 9, Block 3,
McCutchan's Portland Avenue Park Addition; and
WHEREAS, the HRA acquired the property so that the South Hennepin
Technical College (Vo-Tech) could construct a new single family home at 6634 Fourth
Avenue, to be sold by the HRA to a moderate income family; and
WHEREAS, construction work is completed; and
WHEREAS, the Lueder family has been identified as qualified purchasers for
6634 Fourth Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of sale include a total sales price of $110,000, a first
mortgage of $75,000 payable to the lender, a lien of $21,000 payable to the HRA, and
a $14,000 down payment; and
WHEREAS, the sale of 6634 Fourth Avenue may be authorized by the HRA
following a public hearing which considers the disposition of the property; and
WHEREAS, that hearing has been held following proper publication of notice.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota that the HRA Chairperson and
Executive Director are authorized to execute the purchase agreement and other
required documents so that the disposition of HRA owned property at 6634 Fourth.
Avenue occurs as presented herein.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Richfield, Minnesota this 17th day of January, 1995.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
ATTACHMENT A
NEW HOME PROGRAM
ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
FOR
HOME BUYERS
- Have a 3-6 member family (a family is defined as persons related by blood,
marriage or operation of law).
- Be a first time home buyer (or have not owned in 3 years).
- Have the following maximum annual income depending upon family size:
Family Size Maximum Income
3 $ 35,900
4 $ 39,900
5 $ 43,100
g $ 46,300
This income is 80% of the metropolitan area median income - an accepted CDBG
- program income level.
- Have the ability to make monthly payments on a mortgage, pay the required down
payment, and pay buyer-required closing costs.
- Agree to be subject to a lien by the HRA for the difference between the initial sales
prices (the first mortgage plus down payment) and the actual value.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 6
January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Authorization for Vo-Tech project related actions and an update on 7101 First, 7021
Nicollet, and remaining ongoing projects.
Background:
The HRA and Vo-Tech cooperatively, have projects underway at the above referenced
locations and 7112 First, 7537 Girard ,and 6634 First. A project summary follows:
7101 First: The HRA sold the home to the homeowner in October 1991. The
home was built at the Vo-Tech campus and relocated and finished on-site.
Since the sale, the homeowners have expressed concern about the exterior
paint finish, a plugged sewer line, a furnace malfunction, basement moisture,
roof appearance, and a skylight leak. Staff has been responsive, as the
attached summary demonstrates. HRD staff, homeowners and Vo-Tech always
work together on minor issues that occur after a sale. However, in this instance,
final closure to painting and moisture concerns has been elusive. Construction
arbitration was sought to bring mediated closure for all parties. An experienced
building official from another municipality was the arbitrator. The arbitrator
essentially supported the position presented by HRD staff. The HRA is
requested to replace defective pieces of siding on the west and south sides of
the home and prime/paint affected areas. The Vo-Tech estimated cost to correct
is $2,000. The arbitrator rejected the homeowners $12,220 claim to provide
maintenance free siding, reroof half the house, and modify the soil grade of the
north side of the home to further resist basement moisture. The detailed
positions of the homeowner, arbitrators, and HRD are attached.
7021 Nicollet: The home was built and partially finished at the Vo-Tech campus
and moved to the site in September 1994. The HRA has expressed concern
about campus vandalism which occurred just prior to the move (window, siding,
door damage) and the ongoing unfinished project appearance. The siding and
trim work remains incomplete. With materials already purchased by Vo-Tech,
staff has arranged for a private contractor to complete a more timely siding
installation. Work will begin the week of January 9, 1995. The labor cost will be
deducted from the $82,040 Vo-Tech contract. The home is scheduled to be
completed by July 31, 1995.
7112 First: The exterior finish and landscaping is essentially complete. Interior
trim work and finish painting is underway and staff is presently preparing a sales
package in anticipation of a spring 1995 sale. The contract required a
completion by October 1994. However, with the extra fall `94 attention to
projects at 7101 First, 7021 Nicollet, and the framing and enclosing of 7537
Girard before winter, finishing was slowed somewhat. An April 30, 1995
completion is expected.
7537 Girard: Framing, sheathing, roofing, windows, and doors are completed.
The project is scheduled to be completed by September 1995.
6634 Fourth: A public hearing and an open house are scheduled for the HRA for
January 17, 1995. The. homeowner will purchase the home by the end of
January 1995.-
The HRA develops and sells one or two homes a year in cooperation with Vo-Tech. At
any given time, five to six projects are actually underway. Houses are built or
rehabilitated by students supervised by instructors. The end product, though a sound
and safe structure with many built-in features, may not have the polish of a
professionally finished house.
The benefits to the HRA are new or like-new homes, built without labor fees; a 15 to 20
percent cost savings. The savings are passed on to the first-time homebuyers of these
homes, usually in the form of an interest-free second mortgage. Issues that arise are:
The college is a school,. operating on a school-year schedule. Students are
unavailable for work during part of the summer and during quarter breaks.
College staff is often unavailable during these times as well.
Due to the, quarter system of classes and the rotating types of classes each
quarter, the school's responsiveness to HRA or homeowner requests may
not be as prompt as a private contractor.
The college is an educational institution, not afor-profit construction
company or business. Therefore, the emphasis is primarily learning rather
than "customer service". This becomes the role of the HRA as seller with
Vo-Tech responding to repair requests if they arise.
Recommended Motion:
1. Continue to support Vo-Tech projects with a clear understanding of some
limitations to the collaborative relationship. To improve customer responsiveness,
it is proposed that the 1995 revised budget for the New Home Program include a
"construction repair" entry. On a case-by-case basis, staff would arrange for
private contractors to make adjustments and repairs beyond those which Vo-Tech
can complete in a timely manner.
2. a.) Facilitate the arbitrator findings with Vo-Tech for 7101 First Avenue
concerning siding replacement and painting on the west and south sides of
the home and include techniques to improve ventilation of the house siding.
Vo-Tech is responsible for the $2,000 estimated cost. The HRA and
homeowner would incur no expense.
b.) Authorize the following repair responses for 7101 First Avenue although they
exceed the independent arbitrator's findings:
i) Authorize approximately $2,100 for contractor installed maintenance free
fascia, window/door trim, and overhang, utilizing New Home Program
proceeds of sale, as adjusted in the 1995 revised HRA budget.
ii) Properly seal exposed nail heads and shingle seams that may over time
present entry points for storm water on the roof. Vo-Tech agrees to do
this at no cost.
3. Authorize a contract extension at 7112 First Avenue to April 30, 1995.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The HRA/Vo-Tech partnership is unique, allowing the removal of substandard
homes which provides sites that are difficult to redevelop absent a home with
desirable and affordable features. The HRA's homes vary in price from $85,000
to approximately $110,000 which is a market niche between Habitat and Richfield
Rediscovered homes.
2. The HRA has previously looked closely at project costs and the quality of the end
product and determined that more is achieved through Vo-Tech through this
relationship with the HRA than with a private contractor in the same situation.
3. a. At 7101 First, an independent arbitrator process evaluated homeowner
requests and the HRD staff position. The HRA is required to respond to the
arbitrator's findings as if by court order.
b. Meeting only the minimum requested by the arbitrator, however, leaves the
homeowner at 7101 First very frustrated. Arbitration identified a reasonable
response. The homeowner continues to seek her original request. Further
mediation supported by the homeowner is unlikely. If the HRA concurs with
.the staff approach, or suggests another, then staff would have the
parameters necessary to make a settlement proposal to the homeowner.
c. Resources can be allocated in a responsible way to improve the home
beyond the minimum required. However, providing more than the minimum
may not fully satisfy the homeowner unless her position is adopted.
4. All other Vo-Tech projects are on schedule except for the need to extend time to
complete interior finishing work at 7112 First Avenue.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Discontinue the Vo-Tech relationship after the completion of 1995 projects.
2. At 7101 First Avenue, perform only the minimum repairs decided by the arbitrator
and no more, an estimated $2,000 cost to Vo-Tech.
3. At 7101 First Avenue, install amaintenance-free exterior, re-roof part or all of the
house, and regrade the backfill area on the north side of the home at an estimated
$12,200 cost to the HRA.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
With respect to 7101 First Avenue, closure is sought by the homeowner as well as the
HRA. At minimum, the arbitrated decision must be complied with or exceeded.
Respectfu submitted,
James Prosser
Executi a Director
JDP:cak
Summary of Arbitration
Vo-TechIHRA/Homeowner Concerns
Construction Completion at 7101-1st Avenue
January, 1995
The HRA sold the home at 7101 First Avenue to the homeowner in October 1991. The
home was a new construction by Hennepin Technical College under the New Home
Program. Over the last two years, the homeowner has been unhappy with the paint
finish and with HRA attempts to repair the finish., and had experienced leaking in a
basement bedroom. The appearance of the roof and a leaking skylight were- concerns
that have surfaced within the last several months. Because the homeowner has
continued to feel dissatisfied with these issues and with the solutions offered, the
homeowner agreed to submit the issues to an arbitration hearing, facilitated by the
American Arbitration Association (AAA). The HRA voluntarily paid the $500
administrative fee.
The hearing was held at the property on December 14, 1994.. Both parties relayed the
history of the concerns and their preferred solutions. The arbitrator's decision, based
on the AAA's Construction Industry Arbitration- Rules, stated tha# claims for repair to the
roof, skylight and foundation were denied. The claim requesting maintenance-free
siding was also denied, but repair of the siding where defective was substantiated.. -The
award for the. siding repair is to be $2,000. The issues and responses in summary form
are as follows:
1. Siding Issue
Homeowner's concern: Paint problem continues to occur, even on re-sided
area of house. Installation and painting of new cedar siding takes too long
and doesn't last. Wants maintenance-free siding and trim.
Arbitrator's decision: "Extent of siding defect does not justify replacing all
siding with maintenance-free siding. However, $2,000.00 is awarded to
complete the replacement of defective siding on affected areas of the house
and prime and paint to match."
HRA's response: Condition of siding does not warrant replacement. East
side has previously been re-sided. All of west side of house and part of
south side should. be re-sided, whole house repainted. HRD staff
recommends that since Vo-Tech labor and materials should not cost
anything, the $2,000 award could go towards an independent contractor to
install maintenance-free trim and soffits.
2. -Roof Issue
Homeowner's concern: Installation of roof was poorly done. Joints in rows
are showing, nail heads showing, shingle installation started from two ends
to meet in middle, an unusual method. A few shingles are starting to curl, a
condition sometimes noted on .roofs with vaulted ceilings and little shade.
Wants repair and assurance that leaks and deterioration won't begin
prematurely.
Arbitrator's decision: "There is no evidence that the roof system is defective
or leaking."
HRA's response: Dissatisfaction primarily concerns appearance; roof
function is not a problem. However, exposed nail heads will be cemented by
Vo-Tech.
3. Foundation Issue
Homeowner's concern: Water has leaked into basement three or four times,
but not through window. Wants foundation inspected for structural
problems.
Arbitrator's decision: "There is no evidence that the foundation drain the
system has failed."
HRA's response: The foundation was constructed according to building
code standards and inspected. Drain the was installed at construction and a
sump is in the southeast part of the house. The home has been fully
guttered. No structural deficiencies are evident and all- appropriate
measures to achieve good drainage have been employed. No further
response is suggested: The basement may have moisture on the floor if
heavy rains from certain directions occur again. Homeowners have to
maintain the gutters.
4. Skylight Issue
Homeowner's concern: Skylight leaked once during heavy rain. -Check for
any possible water access points on roof.
Arbitrator's decision: "There is no evidence that. the roof system is defective
or leaking."
HRA's response: One-time problem resulted from abnormally heavy rain
No repair. needed.
History of Concerns/Responses at Pro_per___ty
The Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) sold the home at 7101 First Avenue
to Jack and Patty Scott in October 1991. The home had been newly constructed by Hennepin
Technical College under the HRA's New Home- Program. Students from the college have
renovatedold homes and built new homes under this HRA program for approximately 16 years.-
The homeowner has been unhappy with the paint finish and with HRA .attempts to repair the
finish, and has experienced leaking through the foundation wall in a lower level room. More
recent concerns expressed by the homeowner include the appearance of the roof and a leaking
skylight: .
1991
August 1990 House moved from campus location to site on First Avenue, first
floor and siding already completed.
5 September 1991 Gutter installed over egress window area.
21 October 1991 House completed and open for inspection by HRA.
23 October 1991 Building Official issues Certificate of Occupancy
25 October 1991 Sale. of house to buyers.
26 October 1991. Sewer line obstructed by tree root; obstruction removed
immediately. (Note: offending tree was removed in June 1991, but
some roots remained.)
Later 1991 Undated list from Jack Scott was sent to the HRA, listing some
finishing types of repair items that they had noticed in the house.
The items were completed.
Warranty at closing included:
* One year warranty for defects caused by faulty workmanship;
* Two year warranty for defects related to plumbing, electrical, heating and cooling systems;
* Ten year warranty for major construction (structural) defects..
1992.
January 2992 Furnace malfunction and repair; homeowners reimbursed.
Spring i 992 Homeowners called because of a water problem in the basement bedroom.
Staff recommended checking the gutters and removing dehris, which could dam up water and
cause it to flow in window wells. No follow-up was requested after this.
During the spring and summer of 1992, the homeowners noticed peeling and flaking in several
places, -and took pictures of the worst spots. H1ZA staff arranged for a painter to scrape affected
areas, and then to prime and repaint the house. The original painter was not involved. Despite
this, the problem seemed to be reoccurring.
1993
27 April 1993 Jack Scott called the HRA and indicated that the paint on the house was in
bad condition. Staff visited the site and noticed some browning and peeling primarily on the east
side of the house. The painter was consulted.
9 August 1993 A representative from .Sherwin-Williams met with the painter at the
property. The representative had some ideas about what the problem could be, but could not
pinpoint it. It was recommended that the siding be scraped, washed, re-primed and repainted, or
resided. HRA staff consulted with the owners, and decided to have the east side of the house
resided in the spring.
September 1993 The neighboring property to the south called staff because of water
problems they were experiencing, which they felt were originating from 7101 First (subject
property). A lot line drainage swale was modified to alleviate the problem. No follow-up was
requested after this.
1994
17 May 1994 The east side of the house was resided and then painted.
June-1994 Phone call from owner, indicating the browning occurring, as originally
found on theeast side of the house, to be occurring on other sides of the house. Staffvisited the
property.. The problem seemed to be occurring to a degree on the south side of the house, more
extensive on the west side of the house; the north aide. appeared unaffected.
July 1994 Letter to Hennepin Technical College, asking for cost estimate and
scheduling of residing west side of house, and selected boards on the south side of the house.
12 August 1994 Contact person at the college indicated that scheduling could not occur
until September, when the staff and students would return. Owner was informed of this timing.
At this time she indicated. that she had some questions/concerns about her roof, which seems to be
curling in places. Staff said they would evaluate the roof.
19 September 1994 .Owner called and indicated that the peeling problem seemed to be
appearing on the east side again. She also indicated that the skylight was leaking for the first
time. The previous week she called after a heavy rain, and said that there had been significant
leaking in the basement bedroom. She said it was not coming in through the window but through
the foundation. A window well cover to divert rain run-off from the house and installing a sump
pump were discussed. A sump -and drain system were installed to ensure the. home would qualify
for new construction FHA financing.
23 September 1994 Staff visited the home to look at the east siding. At that time, owner
indicated that she would accept nothing less than maintenance-free siding. She also said she
immediately wanted different answers to her basement leaking and a response to her roof
concerns.
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 5
January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Relocation status report for CSM Phase II businesses.
Background:
The HRA directed CSM to proceed with Phase II as a result of a special meeting on
November 1, 1994. Since that time, Conworth Inc. has contacted al! 25 of the Phase II
businesses to initiate discussions about relocation. They have not yet talked with all the
property owners which is complicated by some of them being out of town and one who
is refusing to meet. These one-on-one contacts followed the first event in this process
which was the relocation information meeting held at Woodlake Church on November
15.
Some generalizations which have resulted from Conworth's contacts follow:
• Many of the businesses enjoy below market rents paying $1,500 to $2,500 per
month. At a new location, Conworth personnel think the rent will be at least
double and in some cases triple this amount.
- Some of the businesses have unique physical needs which have been met at the
77 1/2 Street locations, such as overhead door storage space immediately
adjacent to their office.
• Because of zoning restrictions in metro area communities, businesses may have
to redefine their operations.
• The visibility and convenient access of this location is very difficult to duplicate
The relocation benefits available under the regulations have limits. The maximum re-
establishment expense is $10,000. This payment, for example, is intended to provide
compensation for making physical changes to the space to which the business moves,
advertising costs for the new location and increased rent. The actual cost of moving
property can be fully covered. In lieu of taking a payment for re-establishment and
actual cost of moving, a business may select a fixed payment which would not be less
than $1,000 nor more than $20,000. (One business has submitted re-establishment
costs of approximately $70,000. Approximately 60% or $40,000 is the rent differential
for 24 months. The actual cost of moving property can be fully covered.)
Recommended Motion:
Discuss the status of relocation in Phase II of the project.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The initial relocation contracts have been made and the process is continuing.
2. Representatives of Conworth Inc. will be in attendance at the January 17 HRA
meeting.
3. Statements were made by the HRA at the public hearing in support of keeping
these businesses in the City of Richfield.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Delay the discussion.
2. Not have a discussion.
DiscussionlDecision Mode:
The HRA authorized condemnation of the two properties north of 77 1/2 Street and
immediately adjacent to Colfax Avenue. If the quick-take petition is granted by District
Court, the HRA will take title to the property on February 23. The businesses in those
properties must be located by February 28 (at least two of these businesses have found
relocation sites). Although condemnation has not been filed on the balance of the
Phase II property, relocation could be required 90 days thereafter. Properties on the
north side of 77 1/2 Street will be needed before those on the south side because of the
location of the proposed new buildings.
Respectf ly submitted,
Jame .Prosser
City Hager
JDP:cak
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No: 4
January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Designation of official newspaper for 1995.
Background:
The Richfield Sun Current, published by Minnesota Sun Publications, has been the
City's and HRA's official newspaper for several years.
Attached is a copy of a letter from Minnesota Sun Publications requesting that they be
designated the official newspaper for the City of Richfield for 1995. The 1995 legal
advertising rate is 6% higher than the 1994 rate.
1 Column Width
$1.02 per line -first insertion ($11.22 per inch)
$0.51 per line -subsequent insertions ($5.61 per inch)
2 Column Width
$2.02 per line -first insertion ($22.44 per inch)
$1.02 per line -subsequent insertions ($11.22 per inch)
The City submits legal notices to the Sun Newspaper on diskettes, therefore qualifying
fora 15% discount.
Recommended Motion:
Designate the Richfield Sun Current as the official newspaper of the Richfield HRA for
the year 1995.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The paper is delivered to each residence in the City, thereby providing City-wide
coverage of legal notices to residents.
2. The paper has served well as the official newspaper for many years.
3. The paper has expressed a desire to continue to provide this service.
4. The newspaper is in close proximity to City offices if it is necessary to hand deliver
legal notices before publication deadlines.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Not making a designation and request the City Clerk's office #o check into using
another publication, such as the Minneapolis Star Tribune, however, this would be
much more costly.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed on the January 17, 1995 HRA agenda so that a designation
can be made for 1995.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame .Prosser
Execut ve Director
JDP:cak
. ~ '_~.. P ti ~_~ ~ t Y Y ~.'~ j µ F ~ 1 `~, Y ~ < ;' ~ « 4 4 5 k a > '~ ,:_, c ; 2s
~ ~ ~ ~ u: R ~,w y'-0e~•~ } :..,r •~? ~ k f ti r.I{ ~`.~ q F 4~'~''•fy F: .7 T-.:
'~'!~ ~ 7 J fl ~'}'L' w ~..~ rj..; x,J r', r ~ .h 1.F tY cA~ L`.S`. ~;,f ~ ~7 ~l. l k'~`;
w+ ~ } '~( J~,~yyx- r ~ ' : ~ r Z - ~ ~rt -~1+6 y .~,~ '~'l y, r ~`! r ~G ~4., '~ r ~',
y .,f ., ~ -r ~ ~ i ~y~y , 4 i 4m t ,~ r ~
. ~~ W. ~ ~ h ~' i ~. 1 f~ _ j fc t., r,'S I <~` ; ~ ? z ~k~ fP'Y C'~ ~ - '',.
~r ~" ~ G,. ~ as'S ~4~ ~."i '4. ,~ .~. "c*~< i;~ ;{4.'';3 , a ;' t ~< '' _ ~d ~h. `Z ~.'~ ark `:
~.~ a~ '~~, v ' _ i .y.
3~~~p _ ~ h t Sun.P9~t ? SUri+s~ilOc z ~ e` F W~~'Y~~~+~''~~r~~. K ``.~' . tr;~a.,, , ~ ~~
~1'~'-i'-` ,g. ~ r ~? .c„ ~~~~..t a v Y ~ `~ ~ rte ~ n c
,y ~x ,r ~ a A': r r ~ ~- k v F" rd `a ,~~~ '~ ~r~~,4- r^!'~
y ~kF,~{ d
ti
c ~„ r ~ z
~~ ~~- 'r~ w fem.- i, _,r.{~,
~~~~~ ~ Berber ~ ~ y `, f':
.:. f ~ Z.
1 tv. {,Sri- 'C ~ f ~~ 4' C~- i
~` k -~ 2 1, 1 ~'{{ ~~"`
~~ ~t' grid avenue South , °,~
r~ a ~:
~~~` ~N S 5423 ~ }
3*€ - ~ -, e~f .. ~ ~ _~ T i ~ -
~l ~~~ 't
Aim '^S~ ri , ~; ' - ~ ~ ~' `'.£ -'I
consider the Sun-Current as the city of Richfield's offiicta~ n
~~~~zational meeting, ~ ' ~~
.K `~e rate st~FUeture;~ur Ie~als.effechveJanuar~F,1, 3'~~5 'will be ,,
~~ $ ` ~ x`' 1 cvtu~n width: ~1.4~Yper"1ii7e ~~~irst insertion ~$I l:
" ~ ~ ~ ~_' '~~ X0.51 per line. subsequent ~serttp,
~;~ r ~ ~ -
~ t~rY 1. ~ -
k ~ column width:' '~2 Q4~per line first.~nsern_on ($2?~~
F
s `~3~ $1 ~2' per Itne su~se~u~~ u~~ert~
I~c~tanzed a>~dayr~s on each of your pubItcatiQns will b~~ ~rov~d,~
~ t ~ ~ r t ~: r, w" ~. :.~ ' ~- ,. ~ F t d '~~~ c :ca v ~
. I~nri~sota Sun Publtcat;Qns ~i~l accept Ie~al ~ottces Qn c~t~, =o "x;~,
' ~- range Hof IBM eQri~pattbte PG. ~d Macrntosh word ~..;,,;o~r,,,~,~R~
-~ =. ,
.~ for mo~'e: nformation.)A;s ~hi5 represents as:cost effa
y publicatign r~ve~will offer a 1S°~o rate,chscouirt ort allr~
. municipal"depa~mertts taorduiate their lsgal nonce;
~ ~ ,, ;
,Ail- legal ads should be send ~o o~' Bloomitzgton Q
~. ,
I~ order to''expedite our°ser~rice to"~yo~x, ~le~se direci
e, _.._`:iet_tt:,...a.,..,.. `'742'i'=Liect;l2;ai, Y airy°Riiad:'B1bt~1
.r
- ~',
Thank you°f
`. nieased'to se
Stnc~re#y` -/f
~/i~ //'
_ .,
"_r
a ';
,- ~~'
Bfoomingtan Office` ?831
c i ,r _ o ~ t
r 1
...... s Jy.l av'.. _
~ ~
~ , c ~~+" {
~ pet ~ ,
f' ~' Y .
'~ ~ r
:~ ~'~
" /~ t `
1 y~ w - d ~ ~:
ter:
,f ~~,_ :,
k :~.}
t ..
1 ~h~ ~~
f
y !
r ~ +"`~-
wide~`
89,~~'~,~a3,
-pp ,~oir '~ ,:
~-
~~
~.
~~~ ,"
~`k ¢~' ~~
~~., ,
~ta~;
w~a~"
` a .tom v ~ ~x,~~~ ~ si ~ '~ t~
a x, y ~ r 't~ .+~ 4'r ~ ri'.,rs"c ;~ ~F,-,t~~#" j r~~ir~r r'"'~ ~,; ° r~ ` 4y.:,~,
• , ~d 4 cr~3 ~-~ ~ Sri ~ s* :P a ..
~_ r ~ ~ ~ ,r ~, t ~ ~ '3"`~~ ~ 'fir '~`
F ~'~ ~ ~ a a~} ~ x c t :~.~~ i ' t :i ,y +~'~ ...
.f ,~ 1, 1 4~r r a fi 1 -~ i y ~•: sf. ~.
H ;a
~ ~. i , ~' ~ .fix x ~ ~ i M,~, _
- f-c z- + -
ESSt Bush Lake mad ~ 8loorru~gton MN 55439 ~` Ph. (6i2) 896-4'700 ~~
,. l
H a ~ ,fit ~ - .. .
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No.3
Agenda January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Resolutions designating official depositories for the HRA of Richfield for 1995, including
the approval of collateral.
Background:
In accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 475.66 and 118.005,the HRA of
Richfield must annually establish financial institutions which have pledged the
necessary collateral over and above the amount of federal insurance, as public
depositories. The Firstar Bank is pledging collateral in the amount of $1,000,000. This
collateral pledge means that the HRA's deposits up to this amount are secured with the
depository. In addition to this collateral pledge, HRA funds are protected by the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation in the amount of $100,000, making the total protection
afforded by this depository for HRA funds equal to $1,100,000. A resolution naming the
Firstar Bank as the 1995 official depository for the Richfield Housing and
Redevelopment Authority is attached to this letter.
In 1994, Firstar Bank has a community reinvestment rating of "satisfactory." Within
Richfield, Firstar Bank has supported remodeling programs and made various cash
donations in support of City and HRA programs.
A resolution must be provided annually, designating certain savings and loan
associations and banks as official depositories for investment of certain HRA funds.
With approval of these official depositories, the HRA will be able to invest funds in these
institutions, not exceeding the federal insurance of $100,000. All. designated
depositories have received a community reinvestment rating of "satisfactory" or better in
1994.
Finally, a resolution is also attached which designates certain financial institutions as
depositories for the investment of HRA funds for 1995. These institutions, such as
investment brokerage firms offer government securities in the manner required by law.
These financial institutions include Richfield Bank and Trust Co., FBS Investment
Services Inc., Dain Bosworth, Prudential Securities, Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood, Smith
Barney Shearson, and Federated Investors.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the HRA adopt the attached resolutions designating official
depositories, with the understanding that the HRA could not invest in any of the
depositories beyond the level of insurance coverage of the pledged collateral.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. It is recommended that the HRA adopt the attached resolutions designating official
depositories, with the understanding that the HRA could not-invest in any of the
depositories beyond the level of insurance coverage of the pledged collateral.
2. The HRA has worked with the institutions recommended in the past and has found
to have a good working relationship with these institutions.
Alternative Recommendation:
The HRA could solicit other financial institutions for official depositories, but past
relationships with the depositories recommended have proven satisfactory for the HRA.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action of the HRA is desirable at the January 17, 1995, HRA meeting so that the HRA
may invest funds in the. approved financial institutions for the year 1995 immediately.
Resp fully submitted,
Jame .Prosser
Executive Director
JDP:cak
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN SAVINGS AND
LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND BANKS AS DEPOSITORIES
FOR THE INVESTMENT OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY FUNDS IN 1995
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.66 and 118.005.
municipal funds may be deposited in any Savings and Loan Association which has its
deposits insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation; and
WHEREAS, the amount of said deposits may not exceed the Federal Savings
and Loan Insurance Corporation insurance covering such deposits which insurance
amount is presently $100,000; -and
WHEREAS, the deposit of Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds in
Savings and Loan Associations and Banks would provide greater flexibility in the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority's investment program and maximize interest
income thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of .Richfield as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interests of the proper
management of Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds that certain Savings and
Loan Associations and Banks be designated as additional depositories for Housing and
Redevelopment Authority funds for 1995.
2. The following.Savings and Loan Associations and Banks are hereby
designated as additional depositories for Housing and Redevelopment Authority. funds:
Norwest Bank Minnesota, NA
6445 Nicollet Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Richfield Bank & Trust Company
6625 Lyndale Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423
Twin City Federal Banking and Savings
3330 West 66th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55435
3. It is further found and determined that the purpose of such depository
designation is to facilitate the proper and advantageous investment of Housing and
Redevelopment Authority funds and that such designation is not exclusive nor does it
preclude the deposit of any Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds in other
officially designated depositories of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
4. The Executive Director and Finance Manager are hereby authorized to
deposit Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds in any or -all of the depositories
herein designated. up to the amount of $100,000, or such other amount as may be
subsequently permitted by law, such deposits to be in the form of demand accounts for
Public Unit Savings Certificates purchased by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Richfield, payable to the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield
on the signatures of the Executive Director or finance Manager.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this
17th day of January, 1995.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CERTAIN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
AS DEPOSITORIES FOR THE INVESTMENT OF HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF RICHFIELD FUNDS IN 1995
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield has money
which is available for investment; and
WHEREAS, different financial institutions offer different rates of return on
investments; and
.WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield shall
purchase U. S. Treasury Bills, U. S. Treasury Notes and other such government
securities in the manner required by law from the institution offering the highest rate to
the. City providing greater flexibility in the investment program and maximize interest
income thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority of Richfield,. Minnesota, as follows:
1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interests of the proper
management of Housing and Redevelopment Authority funds that certain financial
institutions be designated as additional depositories for Housing and, Redevelopment
Authority funds for 1995.
2. The following financial institutions designated as depositories for Housing
and Redevelopment Authority funds:
Richfield Bank & Trust Company
FBS Investment Service, Inc.
Dain Bosworth, Inc.
Prudential Securities
Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood
Federated Investors, Trust for Short-Term U.S. Govt. Securities
Smith Barney Shearson
3. The Treasurer and Finance Manager are hereby authorized to deposit
Housing and Redevelopment. Authority funds in any or-all of the depositories herein
designated. Such deposits may be made and withdrawn from time to time by the
Treasurer or Finance Manager as his/her best judgment and the interests of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority dictates.
4. The investment of funds and the reporting thereof pursuant to this resolution
shall be conducted in accordance with established policies regarding the investment of
these funds.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this 17th
day of January, 1995.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
HRA RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING THE FIRSTAR BANK A .DEPOSITORY
OF-FUNDS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR-
- RICHFIELD FOR THE YEAR 1995 AND APPROVING COLLATERAL
BE IT RESOLVED by the Housing -and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield as
follows:
That, in accordance with law, the Firstar Bank be, and hereby is designated a
depository of the funds of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and subject to the
following. terms and conditions:
The said depository shall not be required to give bonds or other- securities for such
deposits provided that the total sum thereof shall not at any#ime exceed in-any
depository the sum for which its. deposits are insured under the Acts of Congress of the
United States relating to insurance of bank deposits; but not in case. such deposits in
any such depository shall at any time exceed such. insured sum, said depository shall
immediately furnish bonds or other security for such excess according to law, approved
by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield.
That said depository shall pay on demand all deposits there; and shall pay all time
deposits, at or after'the end of the period for which the same shall. be deposited, on
demand.
BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be maintained a general account. in
which shall be deposited all. monies.. Checks on this account shall be signed by the
following officers ortheir-facsimile signatures.
Thomas E. Harms, Chairman
James D. Prosser, Executive Director
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that there shall be a daily interest savings account.
All withdrawals from said account will be for transfers to the general checking account.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the collateral in the amount of $'1,000,000
deposited for safekeeping at the Firstar Bank, Milwaukee, Wisconsin is hereby
approved.
Passed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Richfield this 17th day of
January, 1995.
ATTEST:
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
Thomas E. Harms, Chairperson
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No.2
Agenda January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Designation of Acting Executive Director.
Background:
On January 9, 1995, the City Council appointed the Director of Administrative Services
to serve as the Acting City Manager in the absence of the City Manager.
Since the City Manager also serves as the Executive Director of the HRA, it is
recommended that the Administrative Services Director, Steven Devich, be designated
by the HRA as the Acting Executive Director of the HRA to serve in that capacity during
the absence of the Executive Director.
Recommended Motion:
The HRA designate Steven L. Devich, Administrative Services Director, as the Acting
Executive Director of the HRA.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. A designation of an Acting Executive Director is a normal business action of the HRA
similar to the designation of depositories and the official newspaper.
2. The Administrative Services Director has been designated as the Acting Executive
Director in the past.
3. The Administrative Services Director serves as the Acting City Manager, filling other
similar responsibilities for the City Manger in the Manager's absence.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Make no designation of Acting Executive Director.
2. Make the designation of Acting Executive Director to another individual or position.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Designation of the Acting Executive Director is a matter that would normally be
considered at the first business meeting of each year.
Respectfully submitted,
James D. Prosser
Executive Director
JDP:cak
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
HRA Letter No. 1
Agenda January 17, 1995
Issue Statement:
Election of officers for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Background:
The bylaws of the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority provide that the
HRA hold an annual meeting in January of each year. The bylaws further provide that
the Chair, Vice Chair and Secretary of the HRA be elected at this meeting.
Officers for the years 1992-1994 are as follows:
1992 1993
Thomas Harms, Chair Thomas Harms, Chair
Ivan Ludeman, Vice Chair Joan Helmberger, Vice Chair
Joan Helmberger, Secretary Larry Wozniczka, Secretary (1/93-10/93)
Vern Luettinger, Secretary (11/93-12/93)
1994
Thomas Harms, Chair
Joan Helmberger, Vice Chair
Vern Luettinger, Secretary
Recommended Motion:
Elect officers for the year 1995
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The bylaws of the HRA require that such an election be held at the annual meeting in
January of each year.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. ,Do not hold the election. However, this would be in contradiction to the HRA bylaws.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been scheduled for the January 17, 1995 HRA meeting in accordance
with the HRA bylaws.
Respectfully submitted,
James .Prosser
Executive Director
JDP:cak
Attachment