Loading...
6-1-92 agenda~,~..~_ CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JUNE 1, 1992 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER I. 7:00-8:00 P.M. REVIEW OF RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICE PLANNING COUNCIL ACTIVITIES, PROGRESS REPORT AND PLANNING EFFORTS STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 27 II. 8:00-8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION ON EXPANSION OR STATUS QUO OF CHARITABLE GAMBLING IN CERTAIN LICENSED LIQUOR ESTABLISHMENTS STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 28 III. 8:30-9:30 P.M. POLICY AND STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AIRPORT RELATED ISSUES STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 29 IV. 9:30-10:00 P.M. REVIEW OF CITY COMMENTS REGARDING 35W DRAFT EIS STUDY SESSION LETTER N0. 30 10:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 30 Agenda June 1, 1992 Issue Statement• Review of City comments regarding 35W Draft EIS. Background: The City Council has previously reviewed the Draft EIS for 35W. A recommendation from the City's Traffic Advisory Committee includes: • Support for the diamond lane option. • Statement o_f strong opposition to LRT in the Soo Line right of way. • An open house and public information session regarding 35W was held on April 23; and on May 14, a public hearing was held at Richfield High School. As expected, Minneapolis expressed strong support for an LRT option. The City of Richfield has requested and received an extension for comment on the Draft EIS in order to provide an opportunity for the Richfield City Council to prepare and approve comments at the June 8 Council meeting. The City Council has previously authorized staff to work with legal counsel to prepare comments in support of the City position. A preliminary draft of those comments is attached. Recommended Motion: The Council should discuss the City's position regarding the 35W Draft EIS. Basis for Recommendation: It is important that the Council review the position and provide direction to staff prior to final drafting of comments. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for discussion at the Study Session of June 1. Respectfully submitted, Ja Ci Prosser JDP:ds CITY OF RICHFIELD COMMENTS FOR THE I35W DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PUBLIC HEARING MAY 14, 1992 Good evening. My name is Martin Kirsch, Mayor of the City of Richfield. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our comments regarding this very important project. We especially appreciate the opportunity to be part of the planning process for this improvement over the past four years. Over the past four years, it has become very. clear that the City of Richfield needed to carefully examine basic planning principals which would guide us in our involvement and review of the proposed improvements to I35W. The basic principals which served as our guide during this process included the following: • The residential character of our community is extremely important and we must protect that environment. • The improvements to I35W should be designed so that the roadway will not be obsolete by the time it is completed. Rather, the design should have the flexibility to meet forecasted demand for the next generation. • The design should accommodate the current realities. and future likely scenarios for both residential living patterns and work destinations for people served by the I35W corridor. • .The final design selected for I35W should have a strong and flexible transit component. Based on the recommendations of our Citizens' Traffic Advisory Committee, residents and institutions within our City, we strongly recommend that the Minnesota Department of Transportation choose that option which is shown to move the most people, cause the least amount of traffic to be diverted to local streets, is the safest, will cause less pollution to our cities, and is the most economical to build. That one option is the Diamond Lane option. The City of Richfield recognizes the strong desire on the part of many individuals to support the light rail transit option to meet the transit needs in the future. We absolutely support the motives behind LRT proponents; that is, to provide a strong incentive for people to use a mass transit option. Many of us started out with a strong predisposition toward choosing a LRT option. Unfortunately, neither this Draft EIS nor the real experiences of other cities who have built LRT's support a leap of faith which we are asked to make to accept this option. This Draft EIS document clearly demonstrates that installing a dedicated fixed rail system .will move 1,700 fewer people during the peak hour than Diamond Lanes, will force up to 2~ times more cars-onto local. streets, will increase the accidents by 35~, and will force an additional cost of $127 million to $250 million to build. The fact is, many LRT proponents .believe the only way LRT will work is for traffic congestion on not only 135W but also on our local roads, including Portland, Nicollet, Lyndale, Penn and 66th, to be so terribly congested that riding an LRT is the only palatable option to taking a car. Unfortunately, we cannot accept that alternative. Selecting LRT under the conditions shown would mean that we were forced to subject our residents to not only the inconvenience that this congestion would-cause but also to the very real health and safety impacts caused by the increased pollution and congestion. If LRT is selected, the only way to resolve this congestion is for the City to spend millions of dollars of its own funds to acquire more residential property and widen local streets. Some will argue that the projections included in the Draft EIS for LRT ridership are unduly pessimistic and that it is more likely that the ridership will be greater than demonstrated. Experience of other cities shows the exact opposite. A recent article in the American Planning Association Journall documented that forecasts led local officials in eight U.S. cities to advocate rail transit projects over competing less capital intensive options. Those forecasts were grossly overestimated rail transit ridership and underestimated rail construction costs-and operating expenses. Yet, in the case before us, our forecasts do not even support that LRT should be built. Yet, there are those who suggest that we should do so. Indeed, per capita transit ridership has dropped in all urban areas-that opened or expanded-rail systems in the 1980's, including Atlanta, Baltimore, Washington, Portland, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, Miami and Buffalo. In addition, the cost of constructing these new systems are running at about 15% over budget . Richfield opposes the construction of LRT in the Soo Line and the 135W main line. The Soo Line option places a new negative environmental impact adjacent or in the middle of major institutions. The Soo Line route severs the Richfield High School and Spartan Elementary School campuses in half and is adjacent to Richfield Little League ballfield, St. Peter's Church and School, and the Academy of Holy Angels High School. At the same time, it is clear that an effort must be made to decrease the number of people riding one per car in peak traffic times. Building Diamond Lanes provides the opportunity to implement tried and tested options that provide greater flexibility at a lower cost to meet our needs. The fact is, the Twin Cities area has not embraced high density residential development nor does it maintain a single focus employment center. The eight mile I494 strip contains nearly as many jobs as downtown Minneapolis. St. Paul adds another competing employment center. Urban planners have pointed to Minneapolis/St. Paul as an example of the development of "edge" cities where there will be a less concentration of employment centers. This calls for flexible transit. Transit that will allow as many people as possible to take advantage of bus, carpooling and other transit options. We need to remember that LRT is not new technology at all. Fixed rail systems are one of the oldest mass transit options available. Dedicating a separate right of way which will not be compatible with newer technologies will limit our flexibility in the future. The use of alternative fuel-driven buses, such as electric or compressed natural gas, will provide the advantages of the relatively pollution free LRT without the high capital cost and route limitations. Finally, we must be reminded that we are here to serve people -- people who live, work and do business in the cities. And we must do so understanding the real limitations of technology. City, state and federal budgets cannot rely upon old and failed technology as the hope~to our future. We must look not only at what has proven to be successful, but technologies and alternatives that have the flexibility to adapting to future advances in technology to meet the needs of the traveling public. lAPA Journal; Spring 1992; "A Desire Named Streetcar"; pp. 158- 176; Don H. Pickrell. 2Investor's Business Daily; Monday, April 20, 1992; "The U.S: Mass Transit Dilemma"; pp. 1 and 2; Michael Fumento. Addendum to 35W EIS Comments The City officials have consistently objected to the use of the Soo Line through Richfield as a route for a Light Rail Transit. Objections include the following: • The Soo Line is currently situated in the middle of a primarily residential/institutional area. The current freight traffic on the Soo Line is limited to one slow-moving, two-to-three car train per day. Presently, the Soo Line poses neither a safety nor physical barrier to residents who frequently walk over the tracks or vehicles that cross that intersection. Installation of a Light Rail Transit line would significantly alter the current physical and social environment. This is particularly critical since Richfield is already divided by 35W. • Use of the Soo Line for LRT within Richfield would cause significant environmental concerns because of the frequency of at-grade crossings at 78th, 76th, 73rd, 70th, 68th .and 66th Streets. It will be necessary for the trains to alert pedestrians and vehicles to avoid collisions. The need to provide a signal, together with the frequency of the trains, will interrupt the residential and institutional environment. • The Soo Line currently bisects the Richfield High School campus. Because of the present use of the Soo Line, this does not pose any significant problems. However, the frequency of use for Light Rail Transit purposes would pose significant noise and safety problems. In addition, the Soo Line will border the Richfield Little League fields, St. Peter's School and-the Academy of Holy Angels. Again, the noise interruptions, as well as the frequency of trains, will cause significant safety concerns as well as pose problems of disruption for teaching for all schools. • The Pleasant Avenue corridor is essentially a residential corridor. The frequency of the trains will significantly alter the character of these neighborhoods. Many people regularly cross the tracks at points other than the at-grade crossing. It would be necessary to provide a barrier to avoid pedestrian conflicts. However, the barrier would interfere with the present social structure of these neighborhoods. Some of the problems could be addressed if the LRT was placed below surface and covered through Richfield. PRESS RELEASE For information call: ~ For Release Don Fondrick, Tel. 861-9797 May 7, 1992 City of Richfield RICHFIELD SUPPORTS STRONG TRANSIT COMPONENT IN 135W CORRIDOR The City of Richfield has taken a strong stand in favor of transit as part of any improvements to 135W. For that reason, the City officials endorsed the findings of the draft environmental impact statement. Those findings show that the Diamond Lane alternative to be the best transit alternative for the following reasons. Diamond Lanes:. • provides the greatest people carrying capacity; • requires least right of way; • causes the least congestion on local streets; • is the safest design; • provides significant reserve capacity for future growth; and • is less expensive than any Light Rail Transit alternative. Special priority is given to transit and paratransit service under this alternative. The provision of one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in both directions reserved just for buses and carpools enables the Diamond Lane alternative to best meet the Twin Cities overall transportation needs with greater destination/origin flexibility than a fixed rail system. The Diamond Lane design offered several important features that made it Richfield's preferred alternative. They are: - 2 - • The Diamond Lane alternative outperforms all LRT alternatives in handling the projected travel demand in the 135W corridor. Richfield officials do not want to see these motorists driving through Richfield simply because the freeway is too congested. The Diamond Lane alternative can handle most of the forecasted travel demand. • The Diamond Lane alternative needs the least right of way to widen 135W and parallel minor arterials. Richfield takes the position that additional land needed for transportation should be concentrated along the existing 135W corridor rather than acquiring two to three times the number of homes along minor arterials in Richfield to accommodate the forecasted traffic diverted from the freeway by other alternatives to the Diamond Lane. Richfield's City officials believe that adding one lane in each direction on I35W, which will provide an additional carrying capacity of 2,100 vehicles per hour, is the most efficient way to address the region's transportation needs and the least disruptive in terms of right of way acquisition. All the other alternatives force local units of government to acquire homes just to widen local streets to carry long range, regional trips. • The Diamond Lane causes the least congestion on Richfield's local streets. The cost of widening local streets will fall to the City of Richfield and Hennepin County. These streets are already heavily traveled. By comparison, LRT is projected to - 3 - place up to 3.5 times more traffic on Richfield streets. In fact, some LRT proponents admit-that LRT ridership will grow only if freeway and local streets .are gridlocked. • The Diamond Lane Alternative is the safest. A technical memorandum on the operational and safety characteristics of the various alternatives revealed that the Diamond Lanes alternative would cause the fewest accidents of any of the alternatives under consideration. Much of the accident reduction would occur on local streets as a result of a keeping almost all regional trips on the freeway. • The Diamond Lane alternative is less expensive to build relative to any of the Light Rail Transit (LRT) alternatives. The Diamond Lane alternative will save taxpayers anywhere from $127 million to $250 million over any alternative containing Light Rail Transit. • The Diamond Lane alternative provides for increased transit capacity. High occupancy vehicle lanes offer flexibility by being able to respond to increased travel demand by increasing the occupancy requirement for its use by carpools. It also can be operated for longer periods of time if traffic congestion extends beyond the current morning and evening rush hour periods. • The Cites of Richfield opposes the S00 Line as a route for any Light Rail Transit service.. City officials have consistently - 4 - objected to the use of the S00 Line through Richfield as a route for Light Rail Transit. The City has protested that the SOO Line cuts through a single-family neighborhood, splits the Richfield High School from its recreational fields, and greatly impacts Richfield Little League ballfields, St. Peter's School and the Academy of Holy Angels. The LRT traffic would create noise and pose safety and traffic problems for pedestrians and motorists traveling east and west through Richfield. • The Lane Conversion Plus Light Rail Transit alternative is an unwise use of limited public resources. This alternative provides both LRT and an HOV lane for transit service. The cost of building both is not justified because they both serve essentially the same transit rider. The existence of both means that neither one will be fully utilized. • Manv of the reasons used to advocate LRT are misleading. A major point in favor of LRT is the potential to reduce overall transit operating subsidies. In other American cities that have opted for LRT the savings in transit operating subsidies have failed to materialize. The argument that LRT will reduce air pollution is a big selling point. However, for this to happen LRT must attract new riders from commuters who currently drive to work. In other American cities that have built LRT lines, only ~$ of people who had used their automobile to get to work switched to using LRT. The vast - 5 - majority of LRT ridership has come from existing bus riders. Therefore, LRT has not played a major role in reducing air pollution in metro areas. Air quality improvements have occurred primarily as a result of stricter federal air quality standards for automobile emissions. Mayor Martin Kirsch summarized the City's position, "Richfield wants a new 135W that is safer, less congested and offers incentives for people to use transit or to carpool. The Diamond Lane alternative best achieves these goals." QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS REGARDING 35W DESIGN For the past four years, the City of Richfield has been involved with the planning process for 35W expansion. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has established a Project Advisory Board to assist in planning this improvement. The Project Advisory Board includes representatives from Minneapolis, Richfield, Bloomington, Burnsville and the Metropolitan Council. The purpose of the Advisory Board is to assist with reviewing alternatives to improving transportation along the 35W corridor. Recently, public information sessions and a public hearing were held regarding various proposals to improve 35W. Here are some questions and answers on the 35W issue. Q. What options are being explored as part of the 35W study? A. The basic options include: • Do nothing - no build. • .Lane conversion. Through Richfield, this means adding one lane for high occupancy vehicles. High occupancy vehicle lanes are also referred to as diamond lanes and lanes restricted in use to buses and vehicles with two or more passengers. • Diamond Lane. Through Richfield, this means adding one general purpose lane and one diamond lane in each direction. • Light rail transit (LRT) in the 35W median. • LRT in the Soo Line. • ,.Lane conversion plus LRT. Through Richfield, this means adding one diamond lane. Q. Which option does the City of Richfield support? Why? A. Richfield supports the diamond lane options for the following reasons: • The diamond lane option carries more people, • offers best transit/carpool service, • diverts less traffic to local roads, • results in fewer accidents, and • is less expensive to build. Q. What do you mean by "diverts less traffic to local streets?" A. The other options studied including LRT show that more people would still want or need to take cars on trips during peak hours. If there is not enough capacity for those cars, then many will take local streets such as Portland, Nicollet, Lyndale, Penn and 66th within Richfield. Our studies show that this increased traffic would congest our streets very badly. In fact, if the LRT option is chosen, Richfield would have to add additional lanes of traffic along many of these streets just to return to our current traffic conditions. This would require Richfield to take additional homes and pay for the road expansions which would not be covered by the federal or state government. Q. If traffic gets that bad won't people simply take LRT? A. Studies show that more people will take transit if they can save time over driving. The problem is that LRT does not provide the flexibility for destination options that a good bus system combined with diamond lanes would provide. For example, if you live in Burnsville and work along the 494 strip, you would have no alternative but to take your car. A bus system would provide a better option. Q. Wait a minute, I've heard that LRT can be built without losing any homes. Why don't we support that option? A. The LRT options take basically the same number of homes as the diamond lanes. In one design option, no correction is made to the safety design of the 35W curve, resulting in fewer lost homes. Q. Can't LRT be built in the existing 35W right of way without taking any homes? A. MnDOT and their engineers have determined that it is not possible to build LRT in the 35W right of way without taking additional homes. Q. Won't LRT carry more people? A. That's not what MnDOT estimates show. As a matter of fact, the diamond lane alternative is estimated to carry 11 % more people during the evening rush hour measured at Lake Street and 21 % more at the Minnesota River crossing. Q. There are too many people driving cars already. Why doesn't Richfield support a plan which will encourage people to take public transit? A. We do support public transit. The fact is that it is projected that more people will use the transit options in diamond lanes than LRT. Q. I'm confused. I thought you just said Richfield supports transit but not LRT. Can you explain that for me? A. Sure. There are a number of transportation options which can be considered "transit." Diamond lanes, for example, provide the opportunity for high occupancy vehicles. and buses to travel in separate lanes from single occupancy vehicles. Buses and high occupancy vehicles are transit options which are likely to be more effective than LRT. Remember, because LRT is a fixed rail system it must rely upon many people being transported from one area to another specific area. In the Twin Cities, there are three major employment centers including Minneapolis, St. Paul and the Bloomington strip. Therefore, it is less likely that a fixed rail system will serve as many people as a flexible bus system with diamond lanes. Q. Other major cities have built LRT's. Aren't they successful? A. Recent studies show that LRT systems built in the last decade generally have not lived up to their ridership projections. In fact, for LRT systems built and expanded on since 1980, the actual number of riders has generally declined. Q. Can't LRT be built on the Soo Line? A. No. We believe that LRT on the Soo Line would seriously disrupt our community. Remember that there are many homes as well as school and recreation areas along the Soo Line. The Academy of Holy Angels, St. Peter's, Richfield High School and the Richfield Little League all have facilities adjacent to or in the middle of the Soo Line area. Q. I thought that LRT was quiet. Why should LRT be a problem in residential areas? A. LRT can run quietly. The problem is that if it's too quiet, people .crossing at the many intersections (78th, 76th, 73rd, Richfield High School, 70th, 68th and 66th) won't hear the train coming unless the trains sound some type of alarm. Since LRT will be running every seven minutes, this noise will be very disruptive. Q. Can't LRT be built underground to avoid these problems? A. Yes, .but the cost is extremely high. Q. But I was told that LRT provides the greatest reserve capacity for future transit needs. A. All alternatives provide additional reserve capacity; more buses can be added and carpool size can be raised from two to three, four or more. Q. When will a decision be made regarding the 35W construction and who will make the decision? A. The Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation is responsible for making a decision regarding the 35W construction option that will be chosen. It is expected that the decision will be made this summer or fall. Q. Will Richfield have any more to say about this process? A. Yes. Richfield as well as other cities and counties in the areas impacted by the roadway all have the right to,review final plans. Q. Where can I get more information about these plans? A. You may call Tom Foley, Richfield Transportation Engineer at 861-9791 for more information. 05/29/1992 14 15 10711176 P.02 DRAFT. UUTI,TTN~ FOR COMNIEN'r T.ETTER I~35W Draft EIS Gity of Richfield sia9i~~ I. ,41~g A. T-~5W Project Objectives -Increase capacity from Minneapolis to Burnsville B. FT~WA Goals C. •MnDbT .Goals ]~. Metropolitan. Council Goals E. Richfield Goals F, Statement of Need and Purpose is nn to force land use and behavioral change. ~. R~;b ' P~gi~ on apt I~35W~E iQn A , BUILD B. Favors increased transit availability as part of any improvements to I~35W. C. Diamond Lane Mainline A.Ilernative is best alternative, as to overran capacity and transit. l.. Provides greatest peapl.e carrying capacity. 2. Minimal right of way acquisition. a. Minimizes impact an local homeowners. i, Requires the-addition of just- one lane in each. direction. ii. Qther alternatives necessitate the taking of additional single family housing to accommodate increased traffic, particulazly due to diversion, 3. Least congestion on Local streets. a. In comparison to Light Rail Transit alternatives ("LR'I"'), Diamond Lane best protects Richfield's neighborhoods from additional traffic disruption. 05i29i1992 1415 Ze~rill~rb r. e3 i. Miz~imi.xes diversion to local streets. 4. Fewer accidents. a. Diamond Lame would result in fewer accidents than any of the other alternatives under consideration.. b. ~xnergency response to accidents an local streets is the responsibility of city government. Limited staffing in Ri.chfield's public safety department for emergencies would make it difi"CCUIt to respond to other emergencies i.f traffic accidents an local streets demand attention. 5, Provides significant reserve capacity -for further growth. 6. The construction of the Diamond Lane would avoid neEd far local governments to make costly improvements to local streets. a. Diversion with LRT forces expenditures far which no funds are available. 7, Less e~cpensive to build relative to any of the LRT alternatives. a. Diamond Lane Alternative will save taxpayers anywhere from $127 to $250 million over any alternative containing LRT. S. Buses and carpools are cansi.stent transit modes far low-density development and disbursed travel patterns in the Twin Cities area. D, Intercit2uige design alternatives. 1. Favorable base interchange design ("Ring. Road"} at I-35W/I-494 a. Provides good access to local. streets. - - b. Provides local access across freeways between Richfield and Bloomington that currently is not available. -- c. Limits right of way needed from Donaldson Park. d. Requires less right of way acquisition. e. Is less costly than Qverlapping Diamond's sub-alternative. ncs razes 2 05/29/1992 14 16 10711176 P.04 f. If camp entrances cannot provide adequate storage space, grade separated frontage roads should be provided so local streets are not obstructed by vehicles waiting to enter the freeways. Favor Side by Side Mainlines at Crosstown Commons. a. Improves safety and limits trafft.c congestion. b. Causes the least diversion of tra.fflc to other Ioca1 streets, c. Less intrusive design than Stacked Mainlines an adjacent neighborhood. d. Less expensive. 3. Favor full existing access at Crosstown Commons. lam. ~.igl~t Rail. Transit ' A. LRT alternative not supported by the EIS.. l , More expensive than Diamond Lanes. a. LRT requires considerable public aperating subsidies in addition to the huge capital expense of bui.ldzng this transit network. 2. No flexibility to respond to changing travel demands. 3. Suburban area i.s not well served by LRT. 4. Don H. Piclcrell APA Journal Study. a. LRT ridership has been grossly overestimated while rail ' construction costs and operating expenses have been underestimated. b LRT's purported .advantages have not materialized in other Am.eri.can cities that have built LRT. i. Studies have shown that only one half of one percent of motorists have switched to LRT. The vast majority of LRT ridership comes from former bus passengers. This means LRT does not solve traffic congestion and it does not lower air pollution levels. ~c.4 ioa~a 3 l~b/c''7/177~ -14~ lb 1CJf 11110 r.~..+ i ' S. Studies show that Diamond Lane Alternative Clearly out performs all of the LRT alternatives ~n handling the projected travel demands in the I-SSW can idor, $. If the LRT alternative is adopted, construction should take place along Cedar Avenue. 1. Avoids i.arge amount of right of way acquisition in Richfield. 2. Provides service to Mall of America and New Ford TawnlAirport redevelopment. ~. Avoids conflicts with residential areas in Richfield. ' 4. Compatible with adjacent land uses. S. Adequate land for transit parking is available. 6. Right of way needs would not -cause serious disruption af. existing '; developed areas in Richfield. C. If adapted, Richfield adamantly opposes the construction of LRT along the Soo Line route. 1. Soo Line cuts through asingle-family neighborhood anal splits the Richfkel.d High Schaal. from its recreational fields, and greatly impacts Richfield little league ball fields, St. Peter School and the Academy of Holy Angels. 2. LRT traffic would generate noise and pose safety and traffic problems far. pedestrians and motorist traveling east and west through Richfield. 3. Text from .staff addendum of 5/29/92. IV. "'Rnvelo e" Conce t dv n v the Metro o i Council ~ ~ i; e!~ p ~ ~~ f -- . - A. It does not appear in the draft EIS. -- -- ---- 1. No opportunity far public comment. 2. Never discussed i.n Scoping Document. B. If alternative is adapted, the Minnesota Department of Transportation must start EIS process over ar prepare a supplemental draft EIS. This concept dace not fit nc~ xat~e 4 l75/~'~/1'yJ~ 14~ 1"( iVllii lV I.VV within the range of alternatives that the public could have reasanabiy conternpl.ated from the draft EIS. 1. Numerous impacts associated with delay in decision as to made and construction not discussed in EIS. C. Federal and State statutes, regulations and court decisions. 1. Federal cases must be followed by FHWA. D. This alternative is not acceptable. 2. Relays transit mode decision. a. In interim, problems associated with traffic congestion, air duality, noise and access .may increase. b. Creates long range uncertainty for property owners, and affected Cities' Planning functions disrupted. c. May leave acquired land vacant for decades. 2. Two designs not compatible at access points and different right of way needs. ~. Additional Costs Associated with a "Build" component at later date. 4. Lssentially a decision for LRT, but quantitative data and analyses do not support that alternative. S. Without making transit decision, no legal authority to acquire land. 6. Protracts disruption associated with construction a. Traffic flow. b. Adjacent property owners. - _- -- _ _ _ e. Fugitive dust- from construction activities. E. Delay Frustrates Purpose and deed, Objectives of the Project. F. Impacts associated with delay mandate build now l.. Environmental Rights Act Dr8 I0276 05/29/1992 14 17 v. 10711176 P.07 A. EI5 is adequate. B. Envelope Concept is not an Alternadv$, therefore, cannot be selected. C. ~7iamond Lanes cl~rly the prefezxed Alternadve. 1~. L~.T not supported by EIS 1. Selection/Construction of LItT would violate Minnesota Environmental Policy Act aad Environmental Rights Act and analogous Federal law. a. EI5 dernanslxates feasible and prudent alternative with less impact. 2. Soo Line LRT worst of all alternadves. nca i ot~a 6 City of Richfield, Minnesota Study Session Letter No. 29 Agenda June 1, 1992 Issue Statement: Policy and strategy recommendations for airport related issues. Background: Recent developments regarding the airport include the following: • MAC Draft Scoping Document on the Dual-Track Planninct Process In March 1992, the MAC released the First Phase Scoping Report which identifies the procedures and evaluation factors to be considered in the state and federal environmental documentation for the airport dual-track planning process. The MAC is accepting written comments on the draft scoping document until June 4. City staff identified several issues and concerns that were not adequately addressed in the draft Scoping document. These concerns were raised to ensure that all factors are considered to guarantee and that a reasoned and balanced solution is found for the airport needs of the Twin Cities region. Attached is a document identifying the issues and concerns raised in Richfield's comments to be submitted to the MAC on June 4. A summary of the issues includes: • Review of the economic impact of moving the airport for both tracks of the dual-track planning process. • Reuse of the existing MSP site if the airport is moved. • The FAA must analyze capacity at MSP before the Long Term Comprehensive Plan is adopted. • The issues addressed in the Mendelsohn Study should be included in the environmental review process of the dual- track study. • The Environmental Quality Board should conduct the environmental review of the dual-track study. • New Ford Town/Rich Acres Acquisition At the MAC Full Commission meeting held on May 18, the Commission approved a motion to authorize MAC staff to submit an application to the FAA for funding the acquisition of the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods. The request for funding will be for fiscal year 1993 which begins in October. In response to this action, Minneapolis Council Member Steve Cramer initiated a resolution authorizing the Minneapolis City Attorney to pursue legal action to prevent the MAC from buying New Ford Town and Rich Acres (attached). The resolution is based on Cramer's contention that the acquisition would violate the dual-track planning process. The buyout of the two neighborhoods would be for the purpose of the construction of a new north-south runway. The feasibility report prepared jointly by the City of Richfield and MAC does not support this statement. The feasibility study indicates a neutral position on the dual- track planning process. The study identifies alternative airport compatible uses for the area regardless of whether the airport stays or not. Staff prepared a summary of the resolution for further information (attached). The resolution was introduced by Cramer at the Minneapolis City Council meeting on May 22 and deferred to the Ways and Means Committee for review and consideration.. If the Committee approves the resolution,. the Minneapolis City Council will consider the Committee's motion at their next meeting scheduled on June 5. • Part 150 Program Implementation of the Part 150 Program has begun in Richfield for 30 homeowners selected for sound insulation projects in 1992. The City Council established block priorities according to the noise level and distance from the runway centerline. Scheduling of future sound insulation projects will be dependent on FAA funding levels. The MAC retained the Center for Energy and Urban Environment (CEDE) to administer the noise program in the five cities adjacent to MSP airport. Architects from CEUE have already taken acoustical measurements of the homes eligible for soundproofing projects in 1992. Staff from CEDE will continue to hold public information meetings with Richfield property owners eligible for sound insulation projects in future years. Staff will develop maps illustrating the projected yearly eligibility schedule for the estimated 93 blocks anticipated as eligible for the Part 150 Program. The projections will be based on current funding projections and current noise contours. Eligibility may change over time because of potential changes in funding levels and noise contour locations. The maps will be continually updated as policies change. • Draft EIS for Proposed Extension of Runway 4-22 The comment period deadline for the draft EIS has been extended to July 6, 1992. The initial draft EIS was released on December 5, 1991. The extension was granted to provide parties an opportunity to review a supplement issue by MnDOT. The supplement covers issues regarding flight departure headings for the runway extension. Staff is currently reviewing the supplemental material. • MSP Symposia Richfield and Bloomington staff and chamber of commerce representatives continue to develop plans for a seminar series on the future of MSP airport. Staff met with Sonia Cairns, co- owner of Marecek, Cairns & Yelsey, Inc., on May 15 and May 27 to discuss a proposal submitted by her company to provide management and consulting services for the seminar series. The firm specializes in coordinating public affairs seminars, lecture series, annual meetings and other events. Attached is the proposal which outlines the proposed symposia format, schedule and costs. Bloomington and Richfield are currently identifying private funding sources for the project. Recommended Motion: With this background information, the following recommendations are provided to address these issues: • MAC Draft Scopinq Document on Dual-Track Plannincr Process The City Council may submit input to staff on issues and concerns to be included in the written comments submitted to the MAC on the draft scoping document. • New Ford Town/Rich Acres Acquisition Staff will continue to inform the Council about the progress of the proposed acquisition of the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods. • FAA Part 150 Program Staff will continue to update the Council of the FAA Part 150 Program. • Draft EIS for Proposed Extension of Runway 4-22 Staff will continue to keep the Council informed of the environmental review process for the proposed extension of runway 4-22. Alternative Recommendation: A variety of alternative recommendations may be discussed at the June 1, 1992 Study Session. Discussion/Decision Mode: These matters will be discussed at the June 1, 1992 Study Session. Respectfully submitted, - , James;; D. Prosser City,_,Manager JDP:ds Attachments 337-9215 May 28, 1992 Mr . Nigel Finney Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55450 Mr. Glen Oreutt Federal Aviation Administration 6020 28th Avenue South, Suite 102 Minneapolis, MN 55450 RE: Comments on Dual-Track Airport Planning Process -First Phase Scoping Report Gentlemen I represent the City of Richfield as legal counsel. The following comments on the Dual-Track Airport Planning Process -First Phase Scoping Report dated March 29, 1992, are submitted on behalf of the City. The City understands that the Scoping Report is only the first step in a long term review and decision making process and is not a comprehensive description of either the issues to be addressed in that process or a methodology for the decision making. Nevertheless, the report purports to have two purposes. The first is to describe the dual-track planning process. The second is to identify the issues and concerns that should be addressed during the process. The decisions which must be made about the future of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport (MSP) and the possibility of constructing a new airport are among the most important and complex issues ever faced in this state. The decision may result in the expenditure of more money than any other public works project in the history of the state. Given the importance of the issues, the City is very concerned that the first attempt "to identify the issues and concerns that should be addressed during the process" is so strikingly incomplete and superficial . Presumably many additional issues wil: environmental review process. However, doubt, this First Phase Scoping Report fundamentally flawed in others . l be raised and addressed later in the even giving the process the benefit of the could be improved in several ways and is CL7,35508 RC125-48 Mr . Nigel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 2 I. ABSENCE OF COMMENTS ON ANALYSIS OF IMPACT OF CLOSING MSP. Perhaps the most troubling shortcoming of the Report is the absence of even an acknowledgement of the impacts which would be caused by closing MSP. The two tracks of the dual-track process are 1) the improvement and enhancement of capacity at the existing airport and 2} the location and development of a new major airport. The critical oversight of the Report is that the second track, developing a new major airport, is apparently viewed simply as selecting a site and evaluating the impacts of constructing a new airport at that site. It ignores the impacts of closing MSP. Evaluation of the second track must be viewed as movin the airport, as closing MSP and constructing a new airport rather than constructing a new airport as though none had previously existed. If the. scope of the process is not expanded to include consideration of the effects of closing MSP, many significant sociological, economic, financial, and environmental implications will be overlooked . The law requires that an environmental review include an analysis of environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts . M. R . 4410.2300 H . Economic impacts such as loss of jobs must be considered. Reserve Mining Company v. Herbst, (Minn. 1977} 256 N.W.2nd 808. The FAA Environmental Handbook, FAA Order 5050.4A, paragraphs 85(c) and (d) require the EIS to include analysis of sociological impacts including relocation or other community disruption, business relocation, significant changes in employment, and induced socioeconomic impact. In addition to identifying and evaluating such issues, the law requires that measures designed to mitigate them be identified and evaluated . M. R . 4410.2300 I . Some of the most significant effects of these kinds result from closing the existing airport. Ignoring the impacts of closing MSP creates a gaping hole in the review process . The First Phase Scoping Report obviously does not, and cannot reasonably be expected to, identify all of the issues that will later be addressed in the review process. Nevertheless, the Report at page 1, does state as one of its two purposes "to identify the issues and concerns that should be addressed during the process." Therefore Richfield notes with grave concern that many "issues and concerns" of enormous local importance are not even mentioned in the report . For example The issue of the reuse of MSP is not mentioned in the Report. The traffic issues alone relating to reuse of this property are significant. Existing transportation infrastructure would support only single family residential development as a potential reuse . Any more intensive use would require major infrastructure enhancement, the environmental impact of which would also have to be reviewed as required by law. Loss or relocation of jobs is not mentioned. It is estimated that MSP creates 84, 200 jobs locally with 24,108 tied directly to airport activity. CLI35508 RC125-48 Mr . Nigel Finney Mr . Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 3 No mention is made of the need to determine whether closing MSP would result in business relocation, community disruption, the alteration of surface transportation patterns, or social impact on the local area. - No mention is made of induced socioeconomic impact such as shifts in population movement and growth, changes in public service demands, or general changes in business and economic activity resulting from closing MSP . The city strongly recommends that the Report be amended to address such issues. The complete absence in the Report of any acknowledgment that issues and concerns relating to closing MSP are a part of this process is evidence of a fundamental shortcoming of the Report which must be remedied if the environmental review of the dual-track process is to be legally defensible and useful to decisionmakers . II. IMPORTANCE OF STATEMENT OF PURPOSE. Federal and state law require that environmental impacts statement include a statement of the purpose of the proposed project . M . R . 4410.2300 E; 40 C . F . R . §1502.13; FAA Order 5050.4A, paragraph 82. The city wishes to stress the importance of complying with this requirement as the review process proceeds. Without a clear statement of purpose or purposes, it will not be possible for decision makers to weigh the importance of achieving those purposes . Moreover, both state and federal law require the identification and evaluation of alternative measures to accomplish the purpose of the project. M.R. 4410.2300 G; FAA Order 5050.4A, paragraph 83 (which quotes CEQ Regulations 1502.14 as stating "this section is the heart of the environmental impact statement") . Without a clear statement of purpose it is not possible to identify alternative means of accomplishing the same purpose . Even if alternatives are identified, it is not possible to determine the efficacy of the alternatives if there is no statement of purpose against which they can be measured. Furthermore, in making a final decision among alternatives, the need for the project must be weighed against its adverse impacts, an exercise which is not possible without a clear statement of the purpose or purposes of the project . As noted in the following section, there may be multiple purposes for the project which are independent of each other. Serving one purpose may frustrate another. Therefore it is critically important that the purpose or purposes are clearly identified so that a meaningful selection is possible. CLL35508 RC125-48 Mr. Nigel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 4 It may be that a clearly articulated and comprehensive statement of purposes will be developed as a part of this process . However, Richfield is not aware that this essential first step has yet been taken by any responsible authority. To date, the proposals being studied in the dual-track process have been described as furthering a number of purposes including: meeting the air transportation capacity needs of the region, assuring the continued health of the regional economy, and reducing the impact of noise . The City urges those responsible for the dual-track planning process to be mindful that the statement of purpose is the logical foundation of the entire process and should be the subject of thorough and critical attention early in the planning process . III. DEVELOPMENT A PROCESS AND OF CRITERIA FOR DECISION MAKING. Given the scope of the undertaking and the complexity of the issues involved, the city is disappointed that the preliminary scoping document is silent on the development of a rigorous and thorough decision making matrix. The decision whether to build a new airport involves a host of extraordinarily complex issues, perhaps more complex than any ever before addressed in this state . Such a project would be an enormous public works project with implications far beyond issues of airport capacity -issues such as economic costs, social costs, impact on existing businesses and on regional development, loss of jobs, infrastructure replacement, changes in transportation and development, ability of the state, the region and the airline industry to finance the project, reuse of the existing airport site, and many other issues . The city is concerned about development of a thoughtful methodology for decision making not only because it is not addressed in the report, but because such an approach has been largely lacking in the public discussion and in the consideration of dual-track issues by public authorities in the past. In 1991, the cities of Bloomington, Burnsville, Eden Prairie, Edina and Richfield commissioned a study on the future of MSP airport in view of the pending dual-track planning process . The study was prepared by Mendelsohn Associates of Washington, D . C . In that report, a number of the shortcomings of the studies previously conducted by public authorities were identified. For example, Dr. Steven Fuller stated in the Mendelsohn Report "A review of previous studies relating to the assessment of the airport and proposed alternatives has not revealed that they have included a full and properly seoped economic analysis or that anyone can cite any evidence that shows that the long-term economic impact of a new airport CLb35508 RC125-48 Mr . Nigel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 5 to replace MSP would generate a positive net benefit to the region or state." "The inference that ntl eWene at d by MSP, let along those that could exceeding those pres y g be realized at MSP at the equivalent time (e. g. 2010) ,with reinvestment at MSP cannot be taken for granted. No evidence has been found to support this apparently foregone conclusion." "No forecasts of economic opportunity costs associated with the capital improvement cost differential between a new airport and an upgraded and expanded existing airport have been discovered." "Lastly, the concepts of public and private sector economic costs and benefits seem to have been merged or confused. The local public revenue and expenditure consequences of this action are significant well beyond the costs of construction as are the costs and benefits impacting individual firms, property owners, investors and persons working in or servicing affected businesses." The development of a rigorous decision making methodology in complex issues is especially important since the statement of purpose will, in all probability, result in the identification of several purposes, the pursuit of which may lead to opposite decisions . For example, one might identify as purposes 1) to meet air transportation capacity needs, and 2) to reduce the environmental (noise) impact. How will decision makers deal with a finding, for example, that the environmental, social, and economic impacts are significantly lower if the airport is moved, but there is no air transportation capacity need for a new airport? Conversely, how should decision makers deal with a decision if they find that the adverse environmental, social and economic impacts are significantly greater if the airport is moved but that there is a substantial need for additional capacity? Different results may be reached in analyses based on yet other purposes such as improving safety or promoting the economic health of the regional economy. If the exercise of identifying the purposes of the project results in the identification of multiple independent purposes, it is critical that a process be developed that allows not only a meaningful independent evaluation of the extend to which each alternative accomplishes these purposes, but also a methodology for deciding among the identified alternatives on the basis of information adduced in the environmental review process . CLL35508 RC125-48 Mr . Nigel Finney Mr . Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 6 The courts have declared environmental impact statements to be legally inadequate which did not include a sufficiently well designed methodology of comparing and evaluating environmental impacts of alternatives and weighing those impacts against the purposes identified for the project. The environmental impact statement in Cedar-Riverside Environmental Defense Fund v . Hills , (D . C . Minn . , 1976) 422 F . Supp . at 294 , was found inadequate in part because it did not develop a "quantitative or semi-quantitative matrix comparison of the differential effects of alternatives on a range of environmental variables." 422 F .Supp . at 305. "Their [was ] no attempt to weigh the factors, no calculus as to the costs and benefits and therefore no basis for reaching a conclusion as to the desirability of the alternative . " 422 F .Supp . at 307 . The court quoted one witness with approval who indicated that ... an adequate comparison and evaluation of alternatives requires 1) a method for measuring the effect of each alternative on each environmental variable, 2) a comparison of the relative effects of each alternative on each variable, 3) a method of weighing the importance of different environment effects and 4) the balancing of costs and benefits of each alternative. ... [In] the absence of such acost/benefit calculus there is no basis for the drawing of conclusions . 422 F .Supp . at 309 . The City of Richfield urges those responsible for the dual-track process to devote early and careful attention to the development of a methodology which will allow meaningful comparison of alternatives so that, as the dual-track process proceeds, the information developed in earlier stages of the process will be useful in the decisions which must be made in later stages . IV. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION CAPACITY STUDY. No reference is made in the report to the system capacity study being undertaken by the Federal Aviation Administration System Capacity office. During the next 18 months, the FAA will provide an airport capacity design team to study and report on future development at MSP . The FAA examines the aviation system's capacity from a 'ground up' view, encompassing existing airport capacity, terminal airspace procedures, en route airspace capacity and new technology. CLL35508 RC125-48 Mr. Nigel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 7 The FAA is co-sponsoring airport capacity design teams at major airports across the U . S . Airport operators , airlines and other aviation industry representations work together with FAA representatives to analyze the capacity problem at each individual airport . Capacity-enhancing strategies and related projects are developed . Airport Capacity Design Teams have developed more- than 400 airport capacity projects . New runways are being considered at more than a half dozen major airports as a direct result of design team efforts . Potential improvements evaluated at each airport include airfield improvements, facilities and equipment improvements, operational improvements, and user improvements. This broad-based, objective approach to airport planning has been scheduled for MSP within the next 18 months. It appears self-evident that any major advancement of the dual-track process should take advantage of such capacity planning. However, the Report makes no provision for incorporating the FAA's Design Team. study into MSP development . Results of the FAA study should be received prior to initiating environmental review of the MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan. The FAA may generate additional alternatives not previously considered by MAC . To initiate review prior to receipt of the FAA Report would be to prejudge the results and could have the practical effect of eliminating consideration of important options identified by the FAA . V . IDENTIFICATION OF MITIGATIVE MEASURES . State and federal law require that an environmental impact statement discuss steps that can be taken to mitigate adverse environmental impact from a proposed project and alternatives to the project . CEQ Regulations 40 C . F . R . § 1502.16 (h) ; 40 C . F . R . § 1502.14 (f) , FAA Order 5050.4A paragraph 85 ; M . R . 4410.2000, Subp . 1; M . R . 4410.2300 I; Robertson v . Methow Valley Citizens Council, 490 U . S . 332, 351 (1989) ; Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Froehlke, 437 F.2nd 346,352 (8th Cir. 1972). Discussion of mitigation measures for all alternatives on both tracks in the short and long term must be a part of the review process . Although the report frequently alludes to, and assures compliance with, environmental review laws throughout the process, nowhere is there any mention of mitigation of impacts. The City is particularly concerned about this oversight given the recent release for comment of a draft EIS on the extension of runway 4-22 at MSP, in which mitigative measures are completely ignored, in clear violation of state and federal law. The city urgently requests that this not be repeated in the dual-track planning process . CLL35508 RC125-48 Mr . Nigel Finney Mr. Glenn Orcutt May 28, 1992 Page 8 VI . CONSIDERATION OF FINANCIAL MATTERS . The City notes that the Report makes no mention of financial matters such as the cost of the various proposals and alternatives and the ability of the regional economy, the state and the airline industry to pay for them. An analysis of the feasibility of alternatives requires that the cost of various alternatives be addressed . Only in this way can decision makers balance the benefit and cost of each alternative on the environment. Cedar-Riverside, Supra at 299. The report of the Special Master attached as an appendix to the Cedar-Riverside Case, at 330 cites with approval a quote from Calvert Cliffs Coordinating Committee v United States Atomic Enemy Commission, 146 U . S . App . D . C . 33 , 449 F .2nd 1109 , 113 (1971) . "'Environmental amenities' will often be in conflict with 'economic and technical considerations' . To 'consider' the former 'along with' the latter must involve a balancing process. In some instances, environmental costs may outweigh economic and technical benefits and in other instances they may not. But NEPA mandates a rather finely tuned and 'systematic' balancing analysis in each instance . " Development of information on costs of the various alternatives being considered and the feasibility of supporting those costs early in the dual-track planning process should be a high priority . VII. CONCLUSION. The Report seem to reflect a narrow and incomplete view of the dual-track planning process . The City urges that the scope of the study be expanded and a conscientious effort be made to assure that the dual-track planning process results in preparation of a comprehensive set of documents which will be a sound basis for public policy decisions . Very truly yours, Charles L . LeFevere CLL:ekr CI,L35508 RC125-48 A Ct4glOTO~NAME ~CCMM~TTEE: i~ESaLUTi4N . DATE: ~ Of the . ~.. CITY C)~ MiNN~~PCLlS By ......M. Cramer... ..~ .._._ Authorizing the Minneapolis City Attorney to pursue legal action to prevent the Metropolitan Airports Commission from buying New Ford lawn and Rich Acres whereas, the Metrapolitan Airports Commission has authorized its staff to see~c~funds from the Federal Aviation Administration for the purpose of buying the homes in the New Ford Town and Rich Acres areas of Richfield; and Whereas, the purchase .and clearance of these homes would facilitate the building of a new north-south runway at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport; and Whereas, the legislation delineating the dual track planning process clearly States that any new construction that increases capacity at MSP prior to 1896 can only be undertaken after the Commission has found such construction to be necessary and prudent; and Whereas, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has not made any findings of fact to support the need for a new runway at this time; and Whereas, buying our neighborhoods in Richfield would have deleterious effects on neighborhoods in south Minneapolis that have the same level of noise and uncertainty over the futLre of MSP; CK-3007 fiev. T/89 Now, Therefore,. Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Mi nnet~pc~'I i ~; .That .the City :Attorney is authorized to take-appropriate legal action 'to en,~oin the Metropolitan Airports Commission from buying New Fard Town and Rict> Acres or ta_take such other legal action as he deems necessary to aGCOmplish the objections of this resolution. -.~ N ~ .... ; ~ ._ . '' 4: RBGORt ~'~{~ Ct~ ~ . ~ L.VQ`i~ • aNt~1C ~1~`~S ATE ~ : :,. ... ;~~`: ~. ~y, ~~. ~~;~ ~' ' .~ ° '. .;. . ! :.. , COUNCIL MtMO[B AY[ NAY NOT VUTIh1C9 ABSENT . VOTE TO OVERBID VUTB TO &U6TAIN COUNCIL MCMSER AYE NAY NOT VOTING ABSENT, VOTE TO OVERRIDE VOTE TO SUSYAIN oziedzic scAlron Campboff Nlsmisc HUary Cramer Rainville Schalstad Cherryhornoa Johnson NAand Proa/dont 5eott Sayler Belton PASSED -APPROVED ~-- NOT APPROVED -VETOED UAl@ DATE PAE810ENT OF COUNCIL ~'~^ MAYUH ATTEST ctTr c>_eAK _ _ CK.7~09 Nw, 71101 MINNEAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER CRAMER ANNOUNCES EFFORTS TO STOP NEW FORD TOWN AND RICH ACRES BUYOUT Minneapolis City Council Member Steve Cramer is proposing a resolution which would authorize the Minneapolis City Attorney to pursue legal action to prevent MAC from buying out New Ford Town and Rich Acres. The basis of the resolution is Cramer's contention that the buyout violates the dual track planning process. The resolution, which is tentatively scheduled for a vote by the City Council on June 5, states that the purchase of the neighborhoods would be for the purpose of new north-south runway development. The New Ford Town and Rich Acres feasibility study, authored jointly by the City of Richfield and MAC, does not support this statement. Rather, the feasibility study clearly shows the buyout to be dual track neutral. .The property could be used for airport uses, however, whether the airport stays or not, the ,property ;could also be .used for a:wide variety of airport- compatible uses. The City of Richfield prepared a plan showing how New Ford Town and Rich Acres property could be used. The plan was prepared after the dual track and north-south runway plans were announced to show alternatives to airport development. The alternatives developed include office warehouse, office showroom, light industrial and hotel office development. It would appear that one of the basic foundations. for the Minneapolis resolution is not supported. because of this alternative uses outlined by the City and MAC. Since no legal action has been initiated, it is difficult to assess whether Minneapolis could stop the buyout, however, several factors remain. New-Ford Town and. Rich Acres are significantly impacted by airport noise. New Ford Town and Rich Acres properties are difficult to sell because of the uncertainty created by the dual track proposals initiated by MAC and the Met Council. I~~~iZ~C~K ~ C^AIR1~1S (ic~cttrvc ah~n~~a~ Irc:~ tc~ t:~.ai~:~ <tJ%°~Yt~t~~ s~~~~i~~ty uiid thc~ i~wl;~~l~tcz•. May 14, 1992 Mr. Larry Lee Director of Community Development City of Bloomington 2215 W. Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, MN 55431 Dear Larry: I enjoyed participating in the joint Bloomington-Richfield planning meeting you put together earlier this month. Thanks for asking for our input. Attached is a proposal for Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey to manage a series of focus groups and community forums on the airport expansion and relocation debate. I look forward to presenting our proposal the 2 p.m, meeting Friday. Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey bring a lot to the table: expertise in meeting management and design, the latest in interactive computer technology, writing and public relations talent, and a great deal of experience handling the demanding design, planning and communications tasks associated with such projects. I'll see you then. Sincerely, i onia Cairns cc: Ms. Karen Batchilder Mr. Mark Bernhardson Mr. Don Groen Mr. John Kenealy Mr. Jim Prosser One Main Street Southeast, Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55414 Phone: 612/378-0681 Fax: 612/378-0078 "Communities, Economics and the Airport: Expanding the Public Debate" Proposal for Management jConsulting Services Prepared for Cities of Bloomington and Richfield By~' Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey, Inc. May 15, 1992 Rationale The debate over the two development options for the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, expanding the current site to the west or relocating to south, has been inadequate. To date only highly motivated activists, with a variety of narrow agendas, have dominated the discussion. The potential economic impact on the businesses and wide ranging effects on broader constituencies have not been fully addressed. The goal of this proposed project is two fold: to involve a wider range of people, especially business people in Bloomington and Richfield, in the airport debate and to expand the debate to include a more sophisticated consideration of community. and economic effects. Proposed Program We propose atwo-step project: 1) a series of three or four focus groups among key constituencies in your communities, experts and policy makers, followed by 2) two large- scale Community Forums where a representative public group responds to issues/ recommendations developed by the focus groups. The goal of the focus groups, each attended by about 15 key people, will be to define the issues and structure the agenda for the community forums, giving legitimacy to new items you wish to include in the debate. The community forums will be attended by as many as 500 people and will involve many of the people from the focus groups in leadership roles. The Role of Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey STRATEGIC CONSULTING Conceptual Development. First we will work closely with you to flesh out the ideas in this proposal to ensure that we develop the best way to involve targeted audiences in Richfield and Bloomington and, then, to affect the wider public debate on the airport. Are focus groups the best way to flesh out the issues? Who are the key players to involve from your communities? Who are the best experts, the best new thinkers on the subject? Are two major public forums enough? Who are .the key groups we need to involve in those forums to ensure that they are more than the typical public hearing, attended by activists and experts only? We will help answer those questions. Conveners. Who should be seen as the conveners of the project. We assume the Chambers of Commerce of both. Richfield and Bloomington and their leaders. Who else? We will help you develop a strong list and will draft correspondence to potential sponsors and coordinate their involvement. The conveners will form a steering committee to oversee the project. Sponsorship/Fundraising Strategy. We will work with you to develop a list of the most appropriate corporations and other potential funders and will consult on a fundraising strategy, drafting initial correspondence and advising you on approach and follow up. The sponsors will form an advisory committee to consult on the project and to lend their influence to its development and help ensure broad participation. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT 1) Focus Groups Participants. We will work with you to involve a representative group: key local government representatives, key state legislators, key business people, airline reps, airport officials, government and independent experts, and "outsiders" who should be included in debate. Meeting Format/Issue Development. We are experts at developing non-traditional formats for intense, issue-focused meetings. Under the guidance of the steering committee, we will develop an agenda, background material and discussion questions for focus group participants. We will identify and work with the facilitator to ensure that the meetings meet your objectives. Facilitators. We will facilitate the focus group sessions. to ensure that the discussion is expansive, efficient and effective. Invitation Strategy. We will work with you to develop an invitation strategy and will draft all correspondence to potential participants. Planning, on-site management. We will make all logistical arrangements for the meetings and we will provide on-site management of the meetings and assistance to the facilitators. 2 2) Community Forums Issue Development. After synthesizing the input from the focus groups, we will propose issues to be covered at each meeting to the steering committee and revise according to your input. We will help you develop a series of dynamic questions that will draw people to the meetings. Invitation Strategy. We will work with the steering committee, sponsors and other resources to put together a representative list pf invitees. We will also produce an invitational brochure (or poster or other mechanism) and write cover letters, as appropriate. Meeting Format. We are also experts at developing non-traditional formats for large- scale symposia and other public programs, especially using cutting-edge computer and graphics technology. We will work with you to finalize the program agenda and develop a creative, interactive format that moves the forum well beyond the standard public hearing. Everyone attending will be part of the decision-making process and will leave the meeting feeling they have had an impact on the airport debate. We will work with speakers and facilitators to ensure that your desired outcomes are met. Computerized Audience Response System. We recommend that one or more of the community forums use cutting edge meeting technology that, coupled with the right format, will make the meeting highly participatory and interactive. Marecek, Cairns & Yelsey will provide the hardware and expertise to use the audience response system most effectively. Here's how it works: ~ Each participant (or a representative number of participants) has a wireless keypad that allows him or her to answer questions and respond to ideas with the push of a button. The system may be used for simple "yes/no" voting. It also features a variety of graduated scales and multiple choice options that allow participants to express levels of support or disagreement. Voting is completely anonymous which, unlike a show of hands, encourages participants to express their true beliefs. ~ A centralized computer processes participants' responses immediately -- and sorts them according to any array of demographic factors, such as sex, age, race, organizational or sector affiliation, area of expertise, etc. Participants enter the demographic information into their personal pads at the start of the program, a perfect icebreaker that also familiarizes the participants with each other. ~ Astate-of-the-art, color graphics system immediately displays the group's responses to questions in bar charts and as percentage breakdowns, allowing instant, two-way communication among all the participants. 3 The interactive nature of the system makes everyone a participant, not just those who are speaking. It greatly enhances the value and efficiency of the discussion by allowing participants to see when there is consensus or division, as well as who supports their views and to what degree. Finally, the system will provide a detailed record of the meeting deliberations, which will be invaluable in producing the project's final report. MEDIA RELATIONS Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey has an experienced staff of writers and media relations professionals. We will work with the sponsors to develop a complete media strategy designed to draw attention to the focus groups and community forums, both to draw attendance and to promote positive media coverage. We will draft and disseminate all media releases. FINAL REPORT Production. We will write, design and produce a final report, based on direct observations made at the meeting and on information from the audience response system. The document will be short, readable, and will capture the major action steps or recommendations to come out of the focus groups and community forums. We work regularly with designers, photographers and other professionals to produce the highest quality materials. Targeted distribution. Working with the sponsors, we will also develop a list of targeted policy makers, media people, business leaders, experts and others key players to receive the report. Why Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey specializes in using the latest techniques and technologies to produce truly outstanding meetings and special events. We are used to working with professionals like yourselves -- people who have a vision of what they want to accomplish but do not have the time to design, orchestrate and manage high-stakes projects. We listen carefully to our clients to understand exactly what they are trying to achieve with their audience. Our creative staff plans unusually engaging programs with highly interactive formats. We specialize in programs on public policy issues, with particular emphasis on the nexus of business and government. Our team includes experienced public and business affairs experts, writers, marketing professionals, meeting planners and meeting technology experts. Above all, we have asix-year history of designing and managing dozens of high visibility meetings and programs that exceed our clients' expectations. Examples of recent work are attached. 4 Projected Budget $7,500 Computerized Audience Response System -- estimated cost for two community forums, includes use of hardware and time and expenses of a computer operator. $1,300 Facilities, audio-visual equipment and misc. site costs -- estimated cost of $500 for each large community forum, including high- resolution displays and other audio-visual equipment, plus incidental costs for focus groups. $2,000 Facilitators, specialists -- estimated fees and expenses for one paid facilitator at each community forum, possible expenses for other speakers. $1,500 Invitations, meeting materials -- estimated cost for design and development, assumes production and distribution done in-kind. $1,500 Final Report -- includes writing, design and development; production and distribution done in-kind. $12,500 Professional services fee. This fee covers the meeting planning and logistical services, media relations work, focus group facilitation, and professional consultation on meeting formats and the computerized system, as described in the proposal. The fee covers the work of a team of professionals: a project director, writers, meeting planners, an expert on the audience response system and support staff. $1,800 Project overhead -- fax, courier, duplication costs, other office expenses, secretarial services as needed. 28100 TOTAL 5 Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey Examples of Recent Client Work MINNESOTA MEETING. Since 1981, Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey has managed the Minnesota Meeting, one of the country's dozen or so premier speakers forums. Members and guests of Minnesota Meeting attend 12 meetings per season, hearing from leading experts and policy makers, from Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan to Gen. Colin Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We handle all speaker logistics, write all meeting announcements and press releases and produce a regular newsletter. Minnesota Meeting is overseen by a board of directors made up of Twin Cities corporate leaders. Minnesota Business Partnership Annual Dinner. We developed the overall plan for the Partnership's annual dinner that is directly tied to their education objectives. We orchestrated their efforts to secure the participation of Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and planned the meeting, including communications and logistics, invitations, program materials, etc. We the People Political Forums. Since 1988, Marecek, Cairns &Yelsey has managed for Twin Cities Public Television, the St. Paul Pioneer Press and other Minnesota organizations a series of public forums which involve Minnesota citizens in defining the issues for candidate debate. Televised debates include the 1988 Democratic presidential debate and the 1990 gubernatorial debate and, most recently, a debate between Governors Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown 10 days before the April 7, 1992, primary in Minnesota and Wisconsin. The program featured citizens questioning the candidates live and via satellite from Town Meeting sites in both states. The RSVP interactive computer system was used in the town meetings and to generate responses to questions on the live television program, which was broadcast throughout the country. Minnesota Economic Series. We are managing for Deloitte & Touche a series of four working dinners for CEOs and CFOs on critical economic issues, featuring such experts such as former HHS Secretary Joseph Califano, former Labor Secretary William Brock and Japanese Trade Representative Clyde Prestowitz. For this project we worked with the firm's senior management team to identify the issues and appropriate expert speakers, designed an innovative meeting format, trained DT executives to act as meeting facilitators, handled all speaker contacts and logistics, wrote and designed an invitational brochure, managed press relations, and scripted DT presenters. The meetings have been highly substantive and valuable to their participants, as discovered in post-program interviews. 6 Hemline University Lectures. For the past two years, we have managed for Hemline University a series of presentations to focus the Hemline community on important issues and to make Hemline a focus of interest among the larger community. Programs to date include atwo-day seminar on economic and domestic impact of the Persian Gulf War, and an on-going series of programs on campus diversity and multiculturalism. As with the Deloitte & Touche series, we designed and managed all aspects of the projects, from initial program design to speaker contacts to invitations and press relations. Business Executives for National Security. Since 1985, we have managed the Minnesota chapter of BENS, a national, nonpartisan group of CEOs that actively seeks to reform Defense Department procurement and national security planning. Since 1990, we have also been implementing a national strategy to expand BENS into several other U.S. cities. The Minnesota and national staffing effort includes arranging regular meeting between BENS executives and ranking military figures, Members of Congress, candidates for national office and policy experts. Upper Midwest First Amendment Congress. Working under the direction of a steering committee of lawyers, journalists and academics, we developed atwo-day symposium on the impact of new technology and emerging social trends on freedoms of expression, privacy and access to personal information. The project brought a variety of experts to debate questions under each of the three topic areas. The program format was both educational and highly interactive. In addition, we developed an educational video tape and teachers guide to be distributed throughout the Upper Midwest. We handled all aspects of the project, from writing a funding proposal and budget to handling registration. We also identified and secured speakers and developed program materials. 7 ~• 3 Q `~ a er Q C F 3 W Z 0 m z w •~ ///~ \I O U • ~~ ~~ nO y . O y.X Ti. p 7i G'Q H; 07'3... 'O,q -~ {Lj C~ L'Q ~;t0 .°.'E la.. L y L~ .G., .'~C. -'~•~ cti ~9 ~ y c~ V~ •'~R,y ~_? ~ V-Lp. C7 0 ~,,. 64. ..0 dOV dV'Ty VLC'3 R-O.Q"~. d 0 0; ~ $:• ~'...r~.... ac' R a~~R•Q~ ~ ~t'•.:_=~0. L.~wL, 3a y mc- 7i~' A c o~v° mo a L O. U i T G° E R 7 R V C yR .~ ~~ ~C 3 C tRj C! N C C .y+ yt., i7 N d 7 4i LL ~ d~ 7 3 C ~,~ T O'~ pC9YL LaOC C• R. '° d~y Lt.^•^t Ol uwY CLy 3G Rd ~~.: 7i'O t ~:p,'6 $uaOdL T~ =ai ~ L ~~ edaf a ~: d- d`-''~CaRi °' :m L~la~w.-oum 'Q o `o d._ ~ L ROp a 09x0; _ ',r9 ? ~O •R L R ~ N•p W O;~'~'O R C Q1 ~( ` ~ ~i.1°j 'R^rN y'O ,.: V j~ ap£ C O~ ~ Ct C d R.O. L C cj'O ...L(3 CC OC't~ y'. •" L ~'•N OL oa'9~4i ...L ~O N LR pd 3OyytCyd7)7/R d LOS£~R71LydyyL,..=Of.~ENOrCyrE~m p%d.+'O Lr'r m~~Er EC~d taC LtONC7L8~G> E L R=~~=O y ~'. 8C C7~00O yyy~~<C'O R'°-+O GIO ~py„~y:Nyy.L pI O,R EO EO-y ~j GC~7v n'6OiRLCI C' L d R~ C ~^ C a3 L L ~~ d N ~ d Ly 0 a9 T ~ ap0'^ T y N L r CGR L QCQ L~^3 Vd t.R. ., a9r._LyG CN9 mO'R E, ~7CM C.ORL~RV O=C fOxN y~c7 adoN Rd~J' ~y CCyCp~09d •CYNR.+y••+a1 ,~C °d ~'... L. ~. r... d0y Cy ~ C Rd~_~'3 ~°'°C7>~ aO~N9 O~L.=~C Vrd~OL :7 OL-C09Rt to t.O~Yd ,jyy CnlC~RRyE~E £oryymCw.°...ayxyLoOuELyR~ £~ytO~etreRC. d..^ a+ E d ~c a s~a,R %'^ N°, CC OLO V R dL CC DD ym. tC30 ~' Ry 09 aDV .jam .L..7 ddL byppyq1 Gp dm °i3y~d O3CLal 'Oyy rt R T~~fI~VCT~rp R~p CC OCiVt R£ N .C=Y Wt°6C CRC ~y pV.tCd°,,CCNm6m3~°^Np Cr°Oy Cp °y°V~a °• ~y'rd 9AE ~T>C.d.C~~C ~t 8'V O~•CdF"TO~aP0 097 OG?Q a7E CO~Ry[7"yg?O'OC~p '~°' mEu ~Rn9a5iaaQcL3'R 3axi~~ avR°f~Q'rRie £<'.:`_°3 £m RNt=~'_£`o ,Oy Cd ~ ~'C ~~9~ C~ L:y~L wR; ~y tom.. r ao.. y .O~ L~ ~~ ~~ ~~ of ~_ ~'`~ `~''.~' ~" ~C'aL~i°d3 ~~ yvQ~a~'~^ r4~t7 =LCy ~~e i.::.~3ov .°. oa3;;aR~E eo..~ '? >+ ::L oadLC'°~ ce: v~~-°8y av;a° ydd _°' a a cd a°,o o L R, ~'>c ~L ~yR 3 du t`7~~~dEvizoe~ L 0971 d pC rC adp L(7.i T~ ;~ RaSd V d 4~~7 ~Cio R.^~3 R~pdq i~~'ta y~iQC, ~,~',=`'~°tt~g 'GC3 O. .d^. O09 L~dyy LOCy C•O rL y.L'!~ry° C d V1 L C3O ~ .V dy~>~Cd '^~C•y O•T9~C Gam. 7°, dmm V mt6n=Gd apu t`"tpt °e<a3~a~ CyvL , £7) oV9 7 = L~tY. VrRy {'•' aY. °,~yi. •p dt-,~..~ >"O pOCrn7:°'' 3 ~3Ea+`o5.yrr ER mLn°°md.'~:°.: 'cam r l R "mO 8 L y R~' ' t y y y,y ~E~'r dds:xE~ _ •••pppNd v ~i °: ~ e d a, ° a7 y ~ ~ O ~ ~ o a'o .,. a C t~ RY _ R 6 E^R, ° G d .N .. L ° °O ~a 'C, C d O pi0 m C (~ •N LEr C E L: N°=~~O~ II O M Y V=C t Cp ~ ~' L" •r1 ~+ r ~ R LN y, LM_ ~ L dl y 3 Rq 7) 3 ~ L'C .+ dc~aR a~a6 Y `"m R~ 0 ~ ~ ~uu~-R a o; a ay RC £93Rt Ta.`COyy NtL LDEV 1~ w w`` W ~iO R~udi~7Cj3O9 ~071Lt~ N y y £ O m~° V ~ .£ ~ ` ~ TL ~ ~ a0 R. _Y V19 O C V ~ ' .~ ~'' ~~R~A~~'aa~'cc~>Et~ •3 ._ L 0 1'. y 7 f0 ~.~ r r r ~••• ~a y r Page 1 True picture of MSP operations fs elusive There are several agencies responsible for tracking and tabulating activity at MSP. The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC} and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA} both record statistics in categories such as total passengers passing through the airport, total cargo routed through. MSP, and flight operations. This last statistic -~ flight operations - is the one most often cited. whets trying to gauge the level of activity at an airport. Atxy time an aircraft lands or takes off, one "flight op" is recorded. The problem is, different agencies use different crlter~ta to count flight ops, and it also appears that some agencies even alter their. reporting methods in order to create the impression of certain trends .that.. might be in their best interests. The result is a very confusing array of contradictory figures from several sources. This might-not seem so important, but major airport planning. decisions are based on these counts of flight operations. By counting how many planes are actually moving into, out of, and around the airport, interested parties can tell how busy the airport has been, and how close it is to its operating capacity. Fluctuations in these statistics are relied upon to predict future airport needs. Let`s examine the definition of a flight operation. Quite simply, a flight operation is defined as a takeoff or landing. However, it also includes other types of aircraft activity which are equivalent to a takeoff or landing in terms of contributing to an airport's level of activity. fihis includes aborted takeoffs, touch-and-go's, anal multiple approaches. To get an accurate assessment of Chat level, all of these should be counted. The Metropolitan. Airports Commission (MAC} counts flight ops, but does not retard certain aircraft activities. its counting procedures may ignore multiple touch-and-go landings and mfssed approaches. Hence, its numbers are traditionally lower than the FAA's numbers. The FAA uses two counting methods: "OPSNET" and "band count." ~PSNBT is short for Qperations Network, a computerized tracking system tied to control tower and flight cox~txol facilities, which automatically produces a tally of flight operations. Page 2 In addition, air traffic controllers man-uaUy "click" each flight operation into a tally called the hand count. Because the controllers add to-this tally each time they "clEar" a plane to land or takeoff, the hand count is considered a more accurate assessment of the true 1eve1 of aircraft activity. A plane making multiple approaches during a training flight, for exaample, would have each approach counted as a distinct operation, whereas the OPSRTET computer might only catch it once. Between the MAC and the two sources from the FAA, there are three frequently cited sources of data concerrdng aircraft operations at MSF. Depending upon which agency interprets the aircraft operations figures and which set of numbers is being used, airport activity at MSP can be shown to be up or down within an identical time period. The Metropolitan Council {"Met Council") relies exclusively on MAC for all its data concerning flights ops. It also places a great amount of significance on annual flight ops totals in assessing future air traffic levels at the airport. This creates a troublesome situation since there are multiple possible sources from which to obtain this information. Since the Met Council is very involved in airport planning, which source it chooses to base its projections and decisions on is very important. In addition, the Met Council has, in the past, s~~en~tigly "cooked the numbers„ to make them support arguments of .steady growth. For instance, all three data sources showed a large drop in total flight operatioxs from calendar year 1988 to 1989. Yet the Met Council reported a 2.9 percent gmwth of flights for the same period.t Careful investigation shows that the Viet Council altered its reporting methods ..that year to arrive at that conclusion. They were not, as they reported, referring to total flights, but only to those made by commercial passenger. aircraft. 't'his number is only a portion of the total which includes many other types of aircraft. Total flight operations declined from 1988 to 1989, but because the air carrier {commercial passenger flights) portion of the total went up slightly, the Ivlet Council focused solely on that category to show growth. By switching from total flight operations, which it had cited in the past, to only the air carrier category the Met Council created the illusion of growth in a year when total flight operations actually declined. 1Metr~ Motor {a since discontinued publication of the Met Coundil). March, 1990. P. 6 S~ s(zr m Foundation af.D~al Trac~C P~ar~r~~n~ ~racess Q,~x~st~oned Programs to ensure the future ability of Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP) to handle capacity demands placed on it may have been predicated on questionable figures. These figures came from forecasts which predicted the steady, unchecked growth of air trafi~ic in years to come. Such pro~ectians were central to the initiation of the "Dual Track Planning Process" at MSP. The Legislature instituted that process as a nxeans by which to study and plan for the region's future air traffic needs. Let's Look at the dual-track plaiuiing process. It's purpose is to thoroughly study the airport issue and determine whether to keep MSP or build a new airport; these are the plan's two tracks. The consequences of the decision between the two are enormous. A new airport mould be the largest and most expensive project in the history of the State of Mhanesora. The primary reason for instituting the lengthy dual track process was to allow a careful study of the issue, and to gather complete and accurate facts and information. Regular reporting procedures were also established, including an annual report by the Met Council to the Minnesota Legislature. This report examines things like haw effective and accurate the planning process has been to date and explores directions it should take in the future. The first report, prepared in February of 1990, stated that "the recommended point at which the region should begfn to seriously reconsider the scope or timing of the. dual-track strategy should lie above the .7-.8 perce~xt annual growth rate." In other words, if growth drops to near that level, the basis and need for the dual-track process should be re-~xarnined. hi 1991, according the Met Council's own figures, growth dropped to .69b. This is below the threshold defined as the trigger for reconsideration of -the process. According to the guidelines the Met Cauacil established fvr Itself, it should now begin to question the need for the dual track planning process. Yet the Met Council's 1991 annual report to the Legislature "assumes that aircraft operations will grow faster in the future and that 1991 was not representative of the long-term outlook." In other words, last year is considered only a blip, a statistical irregularity. So, it has declined to reconsider, The dual-track planning process was created right after the peak years of air traffic. At the time, assumptions were made that steady grawth would continue. This has turned out to be untrue. The fact is, airpart operations at MSP have never returned in six years to the level they were in 198G. Nationwide, operations are declining in most of the major airports. Air Carriers are merging and filing for bankruptcy. Business and pleasuxe travel have both declined. But because cantradictar~r aircraft pperatians numbers are Offered by different sources it is difficult to ascertain the truth of the matter. (See related article.) The decision to embark on the dual-a~ack piauning process was made based on prpjections which are, at the least, questionable State Senator Phil Blueness feels strongly that the Huai track planning process must be examined thoroughly because it is based an such an inconclusive foundation. He was instrwmental in initiating afull-scale investigation of the accuracy and validity of the dual track planning process by the afflce of the Legislative Auditor. That investigation is just begixu~ing anal will be completed in S-b months. (See "Legislative Update" article) ~~~ TRAFFIC DELAYS DOWN OVER 75% AT MSP In 1991, Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP} led the nation in the reduction of delays caused by air traffic. In February of this year, the Federal Aviatiap Administration (FAA} released figures an delayed flights in calendar year 1991, which showed a decrease of 2490 at the country's SS largest airports, A delayed flight is defined as being Iate by 15 minutes or mare, due to air traffic, weather or airfield condition causos (mechanical problems not counted}, Performance is reported in numbers of delays per 1,000 flights. MSP had 7.9 delays per 1,000 flights in 1991, dawn 75.2~o from 1990, when there were 31.9 delays per 1,000 flights. This was the greatest improvement among all 55 top airports. Sixteen of these airports reported an increase in the number of delays, while 39 recorded reductions. The decrease in delays is partially due to the lower number of flight operations at MSP, and also to improved air traffic handling procedures. But the drop in 1991 to less than one-fourth of 1990 levels is especially impressive considering that .weather is much mare likely to be a factor at MSP than at mast of the other major airports surveyed. CITY OF RICHFIELD Study Session Letter No. 28 Agenda June 1, 1992 Issue Statement• Discussion on expansion or status quo of charitable gambling in certain licensed liquor establishments (Ref. Ordinance 1100.13). Discussion• The City Council and staff have been asked to review the City ordinance which limits charitable gambling to organizations that conduct such activity at their principal place of business. In essence, this has limited this type of gambling to the veterans clubs (for pull tabs and bingo) and churches (for bingo and raffles). Certain other charitable organizations such as: The Minneapolis Jaycees, Little Gophers Baseball Organization, et al, have expressed interest in conducting gambling at the Frenchman's, Sandy's Tap, Champps, Ground Round, Chi Chi's and Lariat Lanes. To accomplish this, they would lease space from these businesses and would sell pull tabs.- Other than the lease. payment and additional business the establishments may-get, they would receive no other income. The proceeds that the organizations derive from their sales pay State taxes and then support their ventures. In the past, the Council would recommend approval by organization. Legislation in the past few years now requires approval of the premises. While the City Attorney has some concerns regarding our current ordinance "limiting this activity to organizations that conduct gambling at their principal place of business," the Attorney believes the Council could adopt a policy of "permits to liquor establishments which limit their customers to members and guests." However, the issue before the Council is whether to allow gambling at other establishments. Recommended Motion: Staff is suggesting that with the exception of amending our ordinance to conform with current statutes, the status quo remain. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Public Safety has had virtually no problems with the current system. 2. It is reasonable to assume that members-only establishments are more likely to supervise their activities and prevent abuses. 3. Little benefit to the community is foreseen with other organizations conducting these activities, although we could craft an ordinance that might provide some benefits. 4. .The community standard set by previous Councils seems to be still acceptable. Discussion/Decision Mode: The issue is for the Council to discuss and give staff direction. Other than expansion of gambling activities in Richfield, staff is recommending/amending the ordinance to bring it into conformity with State statutes. Respectf lly submitted, ~~ Jame Prosser City M nager JDP:ds MAY 26 '92 14 33 HOLMES & GRAVEN + ~ F ~dRRINE A. HEINE Attorney at E,Ptw Diract Di&i(b12} 337-92!7 April 9, 1g9~: Ms. Betsy Christensen City of Richfield 670Q Portland Avenue R.fehfield, MN 55923 Re: Premises Permits far Gambling Dear Ms. Christensen: P.2 cfvv ~OLMES & GRAVEN tl{ARTER£D 47G Pillsbury Canter. Minneapolis, :4tinnsgota SSA(12 Tnlrphone (bt2) 337.93!10 b'acs(mita (6t2) 337.93in Yau asked us to advise the City concerning a proposed policy for City review of gambling premises permits. Under state law, the charitable gambling board will not issue a premises permit or bingo hall license unless, within 60 days after the date of the application, the applicant obtains a resolution df the city trouneil approving the permit or license. The law regarding permit approval is similar to the prior law, which gave pities authority to approve organizational licenses. Under the prior law, the City adopted City, Cade Subsection 1100.13, subd. 7, which limited approvals to organizations that aanducted gambling at their principal place of business. 'the City is considering a similar pol3.cy for premises permit approvals. We believe that a policy which limits permit approvals to the principal place of business of the .gambling organization might be challenged on equal protection grounds. See enclosed Attorney General's Opinion, July 29, 1988. It is not certain- what the outcome of such a challenge would be. From my discussions with you, however, it appears that the City's principal concern is -with the potential abuses that arise when gambling occurs in liquor establishments, particularly Chase that are open to the public. Therefore, I suggest that the City consider the following policy: "Premises permits will not be~ approved far liquor establishments, except those liquor establishments where admission is limited to members and their guests." The City could reasonably determine that members-only liquor establishments are more likely to supervise their patrons' gambling activ~ttes and prevent abuses. MAY 26 '92 14:34 HOLMES & GRAVEN P•3 Ms. Betsy Christensen April 9, ].99I page 2 Because the City's existing ordinance, deals with organizationaz licenses and state law na longer gives cities approval over such 7.icenses, the ordinance is ~of no effect. the City may wish to adopt a new ordinance regarding premises permit appprovals. For applications that are received in the meantime, the department should xefer to its policy in its recommendation ar~d report to the council, and the council should make a clear record of the basis for the denial or approval of any permit. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Corrine A. Heine CAH/atnm Enclosure RC160-3 cc: Jack Erskine John Dean MAY 26 '92 14 34 HOLMES & GRAVEN P.4 . I I JLtLY 1988 Page 17 I,t)CAf. GOVRRNM1uN3;'S: 1VONiPROFIT CQRPdRA- 710NS: GAMBLING: Local units of government may not estr[hlisls nonprofit corporations to carry ou! general govern- mental funetlotts. Local governments are limited its tltcir authority to l3eense or refuse ticensure of nonprofit orgunic~t- l3ons wislti[!g to cpnduct lawful gAntbling withln ttsc local govtrntnent's jurisdiction.' Harry I:.. Newby, Jr. ~" July 29, 1988 City Attorney City of Cloquet '. 733 1219 - 14th Street ' Cloquet, MN 55720-333rD In your -etter to Attorney General I•Yubert I!. Humph- rey, Ili, you ask substantially the following questions: .. QUf~STION ONE Under Minrl. Stet. $ 349.213, subd. 1, ea[t the Clty of Cloquet Form a nonprpfit corporation, the directors of which are residents of the City .of Cloquet appointed by rite City Council, the income of which is obtained as a rest[!! pf rile ordinance .requiring organizations licensed to conduct gatn- bling under Chapter 349 io Contribute ten percent of net profits to the corporation, to be used to fund youth and adsslt recreation activities or to build public structures for that purpose? OP1NiON We answer your question in the negative. Clues, like other local units of government, are creattues of laws establishing those local units for specified purposes. There- fore, the acts of Iocal units of government must be author- ized by law as found either i[s the state cpttstitution or in state statutes. State ex. rel. Y'tJJage of Fridley v. City of Calu» thin Heights, 237 Mintt. 124, 53 N.W.2d 83l (1952). It 'ss well establisitcd that a municipality leas such powers only as are expressly conferred upon it by statute or as may be necessarily in[plied from those powers expressly conferred. It ltas no inherent powers. Id. at 53 N.W.2d at $35. See, generally, 13 A I)unnelI Minn. . Dig. 2d Municipal Corporations § 3.03 (3rd I3d. 1981). We are aware of tta express grant of authority for the City of Cloquet to form a nonprofit Corporation for rite purpose of funding at~d administering adult acrd youth recreational programs and facilities. The question then seems to turn an .whether .the authority to form a nonprofit Corporation for rite purpose stated in. your question is necessarily implied ar incident to powers expressly granted. We have found no Minnesota Case which has exantincd the notion of imglicd power in a factual context of cite kind cotttr[npiated here. The question of the power of local units of government to form natprofit corporations for the pur• pose of carrying out genera! governmental or other functions was addressed by this office on at least one prior occasion. In pp. Atty. Gen. 92a-34, January 29, 198ti, it was noted that there appears to be no express statutory authorlty for Iocal uzrits of government to form nonprofit corporations for the purpose of Carrying out Sancta! governmental functions, nor could such authority be properly implied .from existing grants of power to such units. "Y'f[c one possible C7CCCpt10n noted. dealt with the power of certain local units pf. government to ' establish hospital authorities pursuant to tvlinnesota Statutes section I44.58t. An exantittatiott of current state law yietds no reason tp Contradict that prier opinion. Iviinn. Slat. ~ 349.723 (Sapp. 1987) provides that a statutory or home rule Gtarter city nr a county tong nut require an orgu[-itatlon conducting lawful garrtbling within its jut5sdiction to make an expenditu['e to the city or county as a cnnditiorr to operate in that city nr county, except as authorized under section 349.16, subtlivisipn 4, or seciia:s 349.212. Inasmuch as tlsere appears to be no express or implied authority granted to local units of government to form nonprofit corporations and given the language of section 340.213, rite City 'of Cloquet cannot require an organization to corstribute llircctly ro the city for the purpose of funClin~ any activity or government function. The city does, however, have the authority to identify one or naoce specific lawful purposes (as defined in Sec. 349.12 (Supp. 1987} trod Mi[tn. Rules Part 7864.0010, subp. 16) to which ten percent of the net profits must be directed. Minn. Stet. $ 34y.2I3, subd. I (Supp. 19$7). In addition, pursuant to Minnesota, Statute section 349.212, subd. 5 {Supp. IR87) a city may impose a local gambling tax on each licensed organization withln the city,s jurisdiction not to exceed threw percent of the organizatio[:,s gross receipts from all lawful gatztbling less prizes paid out by the organization. In imposing that tax, however, the city is prohibited from using the monies collected for any purpose other that[ for the regulation of lawful gazrrbting. Furthcr- mor'e, the irn~osition of such a tax precludes the imposition of any other taxes or fees on lawiui gambling. Clearly tl[c legislature isstended that tax revenues collected by local units of governtncnt from lawful rambling write to be expended directly on the regulation of lawful gambling. • dIlES7ldN 7W0 Can the city require an organization, as a cpndit3oa of conducting lawful gambling, to meet ail, or any combination of the following requirements: (a) The organization have at Eeast fifteen {i5) merttbers that are residents of the City of Clogt:et. (b) At least fifty percent (SO%) of all menrbers of tl:e organization be residents of the City of CSttyuct. {c) I'lre physical Site for rite orgaaizatiott,s head+.lt[rtrters or the registered business office of the organisation located within file city and itttvn bct:n located within the city for at lease twp {Z) years intmediatcly preced- ing application for a liccrtse. (d) The organization awn real property withit: the city and the lawfu! gambling be conducted on the property ow[ted by the organization within the city. (e) The physical site where the orga[tlzatlon regularly holds its meetings and conducts its activities, ocher than Jawful gambling and fund-raisittb, be withln the City of Cloquet and have been located within rite City of Cloquet for at !cast two {2) years itrttncdi:ttcly' preceding application for a license. OP1NlON We answer your question in the negative, with qualifica- tions. Minn. Slat. $ 349.213, subd. 1 (Supp. 1987) states: A statutory or !tome rule city or county has the authority to adapt more stringent regulation of any forrr- oflawful gambling witl1in its jurisdiction, including the protlibitiatt of any fortn of Iawful gambling, ... . (Emphasis added.) Nothing in the statute spcalss to ttte authority of a local unit of government to regulate the composition, local control pr resic1c12Cy of the organization Seeking approval to C4nduc! gambling within the jurisd:ction of the Iocat unit of govern- trertt. Form of gsr:rblit:g contcmpia[ea fire various games thents:ivcs and rile manner in which those ran[cs are co[rduc- teet. 'fhc tern also arguably costtetnplatcs authority to rcgu- Ia-•c the site of tt:c satrlbliilg activity. 'I'licrefore, the !Deal unit of govertuaent can deter,nine what kited of lawful gambling {if at2y) Carl tike Plata in its jurisdiction; it can specify this ltvu+5 vu~ lug ,vttirh lawful gq,r~,bl;ng wan ba cd.n<ti,eted withi~t the jurisdiction; it can indicate where in the jurisdiction gar[tbliAg can and cannot be conducted; it can limit tt[r rumbcr of sites within the jurisriictinn where gatt-biulg will be allcrwCC!; and !t can prohibit ga[tlbli:ig altogcrhsr. '92 14:35 HOLMES & GRAVEN 18 The statute does not expressly authorize a Local uztit of government to determine the membership of art organization, or to decree that any organization seeking to conduct gambling in the jurisdiction must expand what tnay be precious resources to own property in that jurisdiction, or to prescribe where the organization's meetings must be held, Other than those organizations exerupt from liccnsirtg under Section 349.214, the licensing of organizations to conduct lawful gambling is done by the Cltaritable Gambling Control Board. The state has preempted the licensing futtc- tion by prohibiting Local units of goverment lrom cequiring cleanses or permits to conduct lawful gambling by those organizations already licensed by ilia Board. Minn. Stec, $ 349.213, subd. I (Sapp. 1987).. The question rhea arists whether there is irrrglred from the statute the authority to ilmit gambllttg within the jurisdia- tion of a local govezntnent only to those organizations that meet specific criteria set by the local unit of government - in this instance, organizations which are essentially loco! organizations. Minn. Star. $ 349.213, subd.2 (19$6}, states that the Charitable Gambling Cotttrol Board may not issue a license to an organization if the local unit of gdverrtMtent has adopted a resolution disapproving the cleanse and so lnforrris the board within 30 days of receiving notice of the licetrse (application} (60 days as of 8!1/88). The statute offers no guidance with respect to reasons a local unit of government rrtay disapprove an organization's application. Iat}aliedly, the local unit of government can develop cCZtain criteria upon which to base the governing body's decisions to approve or reject appticatiotts by organizations wishing to conduct law- ful gambling ift the jurisdiction. Failure to do so could result in claims tltat actions by the governing body are arbitrary and capricious. The City of Cloquet, though lacking the authority to license organizations to conduct lawful gambling pursuant to Ckzaptar 349, has been given the authority to dessy art appllcatiott u~tdez Section 349.213, subd. 2. Again, it is well•settled that a local unit of government Wray ;tai act arbitrarily in denying an application far a license. See, e.g., Seale ez rel. Ratner v. Csly aj Nllnneupalis, l6a Minn. 49, 204 N.W. 632 (1925). Given what is contemplated by the City of Cloquet, natnely, limittrig lawful gambling to local orgtirti- zations, possible violation of the equal protection clause of tlic state and/or federal constitution must be cptts-dered by the city. See, e.r~., Consl. ~ Gen. Lab. Union Loeal Sd3 v. City aj Sl. ,Paul, 2'70 Mittt:. 427, 134 N.W.2d 266 (1965); Berg v, G'ity of Ml~+~leapolls, 274 Minn. 27~, 143 N. W.2d 200 {1966). ' Restitution of Ilse reasonableness of such restrictions as related to the asserted local purposes, however, cafes for factual and policy determinations that arc gesierally beyond the scope of our opinions. Thus we are not in a position to autltoritatively state whether conditions of the sort you propose would be found reasonable !n the circumstances. HUI3ERT 13. HUMI?1~1tH'Y, 11i Attorney General State of Minnesota PSCG'Y L. BUNCI~I Special Assistant Attorney General L.,r P.5 3ULY 1988 ,,5„ Richfield City Code 1100.07, Subd. 11 Subd. ll. Intoxicating liquor. No intoxicating liquor may be consumed,. sold or be permitted to be consumed or sold on the premises licensed for the enterprise... Provisions of this code relative to intoxicating and npn- intoxicating liquors shall be strictly observed. Subd. 12. Additional conditions. The .city, in granting a license to an applicant, may impose additional conditions as may be .deemed necessary and to secure the public health, safety, convenience ,and general welfare. Failure to observe the additional conditions constitute a violation of this subsection. 1100.09. Suspension of license. Upon conviction for a willful violation of , subsection 1100.07, the manager may immediately suspend the license of the licensee hereunder. Upon suspension, the director of public safety shall order the licensee or any of his agents or employees to cease the activities in which they are engaged in connection with the enterprise, and failure to comply. with the order constitutes a violation of this subsection. The suspension is effec- tive-until the next meeting of .the council., at which time the council may either continue the suspension for. a specified period, lift the suspension or regoke the license. Failure to act at the meeting shall result in a lifting of the suspension. A suspension or revocation is in addition to the penalties provided elsewhere in this code. 1100.11. Itinerant carnivals: state regulation. .Nothing contained in this section abrogates or limits. the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 624.65 or Minnesota Statutes, sections 437.09 to 437.11. 1100.13. Lawful gambling, Subdivision 1. Adoption by reference. Minnesota Statutes, chapter 349' rebating to charitable gambling and MCAR 7860 adopted pursuant thereto are adopted by reference. Subd. 2. Definitions. The definitions contained in Minnesota Statutes,. section 349.12., subdivision 1 are adopted and incorporated by reference and shall constitute the definitions of those terms as used in this subsection. Subd.- 3. License or permit required. Lawful types of gambling shall be permitted but only by organizations which have been issued either a currently valid gambling license issued by the state charitable gambling board, or a permit issued by the city to conduct gambling exempt from licensing under Minnesota Statutes, .section 349.214. Subd. 4. Investigation:. state license. Upon receipt of notification from the charitable gambling board of the pendency of an application for issuance or renewal of an organization gambling license, the city manager shall transmit the• notification to .the public safety department-for its review and recommendation. The public safety department shall investigate the matter and make its review and. recommendation to the city council as soon as possible., but in no event later than 25 days following receipt of the notification by the city. .The applicant shall be notified in writing of the date on .which the recommendation will be considered by the-city council, Richfield City Code 1100.13, Subd. 5 Subd. 5. Investigation fee. The applicant for an organization gambling license shall pay to the city an investigation fee as provided in appendix D of this-code. The public safety department shall notify the applicant in writing when the fee is due in full, which due date shall be at least-five days before the date that the report is to be presented to the city council. Subd. 6. Council action. -The city council. shall consider the application not later than 25 days after written notification of -the application has been received by the city. The council shall consider the. report of the department of public safety, statements from the applicant, and any .other information. which the council believes to be relevant to the application. Thereafter the council shall, by resolution., approve or disapprove of the license. If the investiga- tion fee provided in subdivision S of this subsection has not been paid within the time limit provided in such subdivision S, the council may disapprove the license on that basis.. Subd. 7. Off premises gambling. The city will disapprove of any applica- tion wherein the applicant seeks to be permitted to conduct gambling on premises which are not: (a) owned or leased by the applicant, and (b) located within the property which constitutes the principal place of business of the applicant. Upon the .receipt of notification of the pendency of any license application before the charitable gambling board requesting such off-premises gambling the clerk shall, in lieu of the provisions contained in subdivisions 4, 5, 6 and 9 of this subsection, transmit a certified copy of subdivision 7 to the charitable gambling board together with a statement from the city clerk that subdivision 7 is in full-force and effect and that the application is disapproved pursuant to that subdivision. Such action by the city clerk shall constitute the official action of the city. The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to the sale of raffle tickets. Subd. 8. Reports. As a condition to approval of the license., the council may require that the applicant agree to promptly furnish the city with copies of all records, reports, accounts and other data which applicant will be required to submit to the charitable gambling board during the term of the- license. Failure of the. applicant to fulfill such requirement may constitute grounds for disapproval of licenses in subsequent years. Subd. 9. Notification to Charitable- Gambling Board. The city manager shall transmit a certified copy of -the council resolution to the charitable gambling. board. If the council has disapproved the license, the city manager shall take such actions as are reasonably necessary to deliver a copy of such resolution to the board .within 30 days from the date that the city received notice of the license application. A copy of the resolution shall also be provided to the applicant upon request. Richfield City Code 1100.13, Subd. 10 Subd. 10. Permit. (a) Organizations desiring to conduct lawful gambling which is exempt from state licensure under Minnesota Statutes, section 349.12 shall make application tot he city for a permit to conduct such lawful gambling. (b) The applications shall be on forms prepared by the city manager for that purpose and shall be accompanied by the permit fee hereinafter required. (c) The permit fee shall be as provided in appendix D of this code. (d) The city manager shall issue the permit if the following conditions have been met: (1) Neither the designated gambling manager nor any of the organiza- tion's officers have been convicted of any offense which would indicate lack of suitability of the designated manager or the organization to engage in the type of gambling activity for .which the permit is sought. (2) The organization has existed in the city for at least .three years prior to the date of .application. (3) On the date of application, the organization has at least 30 active members. (4) The organization will either own or lease the premises where the gambling activity would be conducted. (5) If the gambling activity is to -occur on leased premises, the lease will be for a term at least equal in length to the term of the permit being sought. (e) Before the issuance of the permit, the designated gambling manager shall file with the city manager a fidelity bond in the amount of $10,000. Such bond shall run in favor of the organization conducting the gambling activity and be conditioned upon the gambling manager fully and faithfully performing his duties. The city council may, upon unanimous vote, waive .the bonding require- ment. (f) The permit fee may be waived in whole or in part by the city manager. The portion of the fee waived-shall be returned to the permittee upon issuance of the permit. If the permit is denied, the city manager shall retain $50 of the fee to reimburse the city for its administrative and investigative expenses in connection with consideration of the permit application. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Study Session Letter No. 27 Agenda June 1, 1992 Issue Statement: Review of Richfield Community Human Service Planning Council activities, progress report and planning efforts. Background: The cities of Richfield, Bloomington, Edina and Eden Prairie have recently restructured human service planning efforts in the south suburban area. Part of the restructuring included the establishment of the Richfield Community Human Service Planning Council. The Planning Council, appointed by the Richfield City Council, provides the local basis of human service planning in the south suburban area. The group has been meeting for approximately one year and have asked for an opportunity to meet with the City Council to review their progress and discuss future planning efforts. ethers invited to this meeting include members of the Planning Commission, HRA Commissioners, Metropolitan Council Representative Sondra Simonson, Commissioner Randy Johnson, Senator Phil Riveness and Representatives Edwina Garcia and Joyce Henry. Recommended Motion: Meet with Human Service Planning Council and provide input regarding human service planning needs. Basis for Recommendation: There is a need to provide continued attention to human service planning coordination establishing priorities for human service needs and identifying other planning efforts. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be discussed at the Study Session on June 1. Respectfully submitted, Ja D. Prosser Ci~v /Manager JDP:ds