01-24-94 agenda? 00
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 1994
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE (1) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING SESSION
OF JANUARY 6, 1994; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 7,
1994; (3) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 10, 1994; AND (4)
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 1994
1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT
LISTED ON THE AGENDA
2. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY
COMMITTEE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT FOR SERVICE WITH THOSE AGENCIES
FUNDED BY CITY
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 27
AGENDA APPROVAL
3. COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: CONSENT CALENDAR CONTAINS SEVERAL SEPARATE ITEMS WHICH ARE
ACTED UPON BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN ONE MOTION. ONCE THE CONSENT
CALENDAR HAS BEEN APPROVED, THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS AND RECOMMENDED
ACTIONS HAVE ALSO BEEN APPROVED. NO FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION IS
NECESSARY. HOWEVER, ANY COUNCIL MEMBER MAY REQUEST THAT AN ITEM BE
REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA
FOR COUNCIL DISCUSSION AND ACTION. ALL ITEMS LISTED ON THE CONSENT
CALENDAR ARE RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL.
4A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SETTING MAY 2, 1994 AS DATE FOR 1994
BOARD OF REVIEW C.L. 28
B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR REAPPOINTMENT OF CAMILLO
DESANTIS AND JOHN BOYLE AS RICHFIELD REPRESENTATIVES TO SOUTH
HENNEPIN REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY'S REGIONAL CITIZENS ADVISORY
COMMISSION C.L. 29
• C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF SETTING FEBRUARY 14, 1994 AS DATE
• FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR NEW ON-SALE WINE LICENSE FOR THE
FRENCHMAN'S, 1400 EAST 66TH STREET C.L. 30
D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
CONTRACT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR 80% REIMBURSEMENT OF 1994
RECYCLING EXPENSES C.L. 31
E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
SPACE LABS 610 DEFIBRILLATOR FOR NEW FIRE/RESCUE PUMPER AT FIRE
STATION 2 FROM SPACE LABS, INC. IN TOTAL AMOUNT OF $5,350 C.L.
32
F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
INSTALLATION OF INFRA-RED HEATING SYSTEM IN NEW WASH STALL AREA.
OF CENTRAL GARAGE FROM MIDLAND HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING IN
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $10,800 C.L. 33
G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
1993 WATER APPROPRIATION PERMIT FROM MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES IN TOTAL AMOUNT OF $5,149.94 C.L. 34
H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
CHEVROLET 1/2 TON 4x4 PICKUP TRUCK FOR USE BY STREET MAINTENANCE
DIVISION FROM THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEVROLET, INC. IN TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $16,007 C.L. 35
I. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR 1/2
TON 4x2 CHEVROLET PICKUP TRUCK FOR USE BY GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS
MAINTENANCE DIVISION FROM THANE HAWKINS POLAR CHEVROLET, INC. IN
TOTAL AMOUNT OF $13,783 C.L. 36
J. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR
FORD AEROSTAR MINI PASSENGER VAN FOR USE BY ENGINEERING DIVISION
FROM SUPERIOR FORD IN TOTAL AMOUNT OF $14,390 C.L. 37
K. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING
LICENSE ON SUNDAYS AND FEE WAIVER FOR RICHFIELD AMERICAN LEGION
#435, 6501 PORTLAND AVENUE C.L. 38
L. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM
LAWFUL GAMBLING LICENSE ON MARCH 5 AND MARCH 26 AND FEE WAIVER
FOR ST. PETER'S CHURCH, 6730 NICOLLET AVENUE C.L. 39
M. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF 1994 LICENSE RENEWALS:
HAROLD CHEVROLET INC. dba JIM LUPIENT'S BARGAIN LOT: MOTOR
VEHICLE DEALERS LICENSE
QUALITY WASTE CONTROL INC.: GARBAGE HAULER, 5 VEHICLES
SUNSET AUTO DETAIL: AUTO DETAILING
RESOLUTIONS
5. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENSION OF MATURITY OF
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND (RICHFIELD SHOPPES
DEVELOPERS PROJECT)
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 40
6. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AWARDING SALE OF $575,000 GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1994A; AND
• RESOLUTION AWARDING SALE OF $2,790,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION
IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1994B
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 41
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS
• • 7. CONTINUATION OF CONSIDERATION OF PETITION TO REZONE LAND AT 6438
AND 6444 FIRST AVENUE; NORWEST BANK
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 42
8. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SOUTH HENNEPIN REGIONAL
PLANNING AGENCY'S 1994 WORK PLAN PROPOSAL
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 43
9. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZING REPAYMENT OF METROPOLITAN RIGHT-OF-
WAY ACQUISITION LOAN FUND FOR ACQUISITIONS FOR 77TH STREET
RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 44
10. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS OF PERSONS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
COUNCIL LETTER NO. 45
11. DISCUSSION OF DRAFT 1994 LEGISLATIVE ISSUES
4 0 12. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT
AIRPORT BUSINESS
77TH STREET PROJECT BUSINESS
13. 77TH STREET PROJECT STATUS REPORT
14. LEGISLATIVE REPORT
CORRESPONDENCE
COUNCIL CHOICE
15. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS
16. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS
ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon
request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the
Administrative Services Director at 861-9702.
DRAFT
If -/
00
1994 LEGISLATIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS
CHALLENGE 1 - RESOURCES OF VITALITY
New and modified revenue sources are needed to ensure that
resources are of a sufficient quantity to have a positive impact
on housing, redevelopment, maintenance and essential services in
Richfield. Of particular concern are the impacts due to airport
operations and long range planning.
RESPONSE:
1.A. CITY/SCHOOL IMPACT AID
The City of Richfield and School District should be made
whole for the net loss of revenue because of the buyout
of the New Ford Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods. In
February 1992, the total net annual loss was calculated
to be $350,000 for the School District and $50,000 for
the City, totalling $400,000 per year, assuming airport-
related uses govern the future use of the property.
rp-i]
The City supports reimbursing local units of government
for a period of ten years for property acquired for
public purposes. Eligible projects are identified only
as property which has a total tax capacity equal to 1% of
the impacted city or town, at least 300 housing units are
involved and the property will be used for a public
purpose. This legislation will compensate the City and
School District for the lost state aid/property taxes as
a result of the buyout of the New Ford Town and Rich
Acres neighborhoods for a period of ten years.
I.B. LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID (LGA)
The City strongly supports the League of Minnesota Cities'
(LMC) and Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
position which guarantees that the Local Government Trust
Fund (LGTF) revenues continue to be used for property tax
relief. The key features of the position are as follows:
? Funding for city LGA will grow at the same rate as
revenues into the LGTF.
•
? The city LGA share of LGTF revenue growth will be
distributed to compensate for differences in need and
differences in tax base.
? The new formula will correct perceived inequities in the
current distribution of aid over time as increased
funding permits. The formula will not cut current aid
amounts for any city.
11, L).
? Future aid increases will be based on objective factors
. • outside the control of local officials, and will not be
based on historical spending.
? The new formula will automatically distribute the
increased LGTF revenue available for city aid and will
not encourage or require annual legislative "tinkering.
This will help assure stability in future city aid.
1.C. HOMESTEAD AND AGRICULTURAL CREDIT AID (HACA)
The City opposes payment of additional HACA for property
class rate reductions from the Local Government Trust Fund
beyond.those rate reductions already in law through taxes
payable in 1994.
1.D. SUSTAIN LEVY LIMITS REPEAL
The City supports the Legislature's repeal of City levy
limits. Removal of levy limits enhance local
accountability, allow cities to plan for and respond to
changing financial conditions and the increasing costs of
state and federal mandates. Levy limits have been
inconsistent with the principles of local self-government
and accountability.
1.E. CITY FUND BALANCES
The.City supports the position that the Legislature should
not attempt to control or restrict city fund balances.
These funds are necessary to maintain the fiscal viability
of city governments to purchase capital goods and
infrastructure to maintain high level bond ratings, and to
pay the operational costs of administration of local
government prior to the time that the tax settlements are
received by the City. Cities must have adequate fund
balances at the beginning of each fiscal year to finance
expenditures for the first full six months of the year.
1.F. PENALTIES AND INTEREST ON DELINQUENT PROPERTY TAXES
The City urges the Legislature to pass legislation that
would provide that cities receive their proportionate
share of revenues from penalties and interest collected on
delinquent property taxes. These revenues should not be
deducted from State aid payments. Under current law, only
counties and school districts receive penalty and interest
payments on delinquent property taxes.
1.G. SUPPORT FISCAL DISPARITIES
The City urges the Legislature to continue to support the
. Fiscal Disparities Program. This program offsets some of
the financial differential between developed and
developing communities and acknowledges the greater needs
of developed areas.
2
11-3
1.H. EXPAND T.I.F. FUNDING USES
The City urges the Legislature to modify the definition of
administrative services within Tax Increment Financing
(T.I.F.) Districts to include health and safety support
services identified by the redevelopment district plan and
budget.
1.I. PROPERTY TAX-ADMINISTRATION
The City urges the Legislature to repeal authority for
counties to assess a separate charge to administer special
assessments. Cities should receive a share of revenues
from penalties and interest collected on delinquent
property taxes.
•
•
3
it -q
CHALLENGE 2 - RESOURCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT
Richfield has made significant progress in reversing the
deterioration and decline in commercial-retail areas of the City.
Market conditions, the significant lead time required for
development, and the considerable expense to address the
remaining blighting conditions and planned public improvements
requires additional resources. Richfield demonstrates a prudent
and proper use of Tax Increment Financing.
RESPONSE:
2.A. T.I.F. - INCENTIVE FOR FISCAL DISPARITIES GAINERS
Develop and support legislation that would provide special
financing incentives unique to communities that are
significant fiscal disparities gainers. This would help
balance the concerns of fiscal disparities losers who
believe that they are supporting commercial/industrial tax
base poor communities to a greater extent than necessary.
2.B. T.I.F. - MODIFY USE DEFINITION
Support modifying the definition of administrative
services within Tax Increment Districts to include health
and safety support services identified by the
redevelopment district plan and budget.
2.C. T.I.F. - RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF T.I.F.
Resist further restrictions on the use of Tax Increment
Financing given that it remains one of the only ways for
Richfield to finance the expensive redevelopment of
deteriorated commercial areas.
2.D. T.I..F. - EVALUATE FUTURE WINDFALL OF EXPIRED T.I.F.
DISTRICTS
Request House Research to evaluate the windfall in
property tax receipts that Hennepin County will receive
after the year 2000. Those resources could provide a long
term reduction in the amount of resources needed for state
funded and County administered human service and other
important programs and reduce the property tax burden for
Hennepin County property owners.
4
4
I
J
[/-S?
• • CHALLENGE 3 - RESOURCES FOR RENTAL HOUSING
Richfield has approximately 4,600 rental units (63 percent one
bedroom, 29 percent two bedroom), which were built primarily from
1960 to 1970. The apartments require investment and repair to be
livable and desirable. Vacancy rates are variable. The rental
housing investment climate does not make owner investment
attractive. MHFA rental housing loan programs require rent
control and income qualifying which are disincentives to owner
participation. An increasingly lower income and more diverse
population causes concentration and places greater demands on
health and safety programs. Approximately $100,250,000 is
estimated to be required to revitalize the existing rental
housing stock. Richfield is presently developing a coordinated
apartment owner/manager/tenant program of information sharing,
image and marketing, communication and community service support.
RESPONSE:
3.A. "THIS OLD HOUSE" - RENTAL PROPERTY
Support a legislative delay in property tax assessment
increases for improvements made to rental housing. A
class rate change for a specified period of time could be
provided if a rental property owner agrees to certain
improvements and management guidelines. The agreement
would specify type and schedule for completion of
improvements. The class rate would equal the subsidized
class rate.
3.B. MHFA RENTAL LOAN PROGRAMS
Support modification of MHFA rental loan programs to
provide opportunities to achieve broader economic
integration of rental occupancy.
3.C. REVENUE SOURCES FOR SELECTIVE REHABILITATION
Support new revenue sources which can be used for the
selective rehabilitation or the acquisition and clearance
of deteriorating buildings and replacement with more
appropriate land uses. A metropolitan area wide revenue
source should be sought to be targeted to housing problems
in the suburban core.
•
5
I** CHALLENGE 4 - RESOURCES FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING
Richfield has approximately 11,200 single family homes (5 percent
built prior to 1939, 62 percent build prior to 1960). Many
single family homes require renovation and repair. Many more can
benefit from additional home improvements and remodeling which
provides features desirable to today's home owners and buyers.
Resources are insufficient to counter flight to developing
suburbs and potential abandonment. It is estimated that it would
cost $212,979,200 to revitalize the existing single family
housing stock.
RESPONSE:
4.A. BLIGHTED PROPERTIES PROGRAM
Support the continuation of the MHFA Blighted Properties
and Richfield's New Home/Richfield Rediscovered Programs
which provide funds for acquisition and demolition of
blighted neighborhood conditions. Approximately 200
Richfield homes are program candidates. Approximately
$500,000 annually removes eight to nine homes and provides
new housing opportunities. The Governor vetoed an
additional appropriation to the Blighted Properties
program at the close of the 1993 legislative session.
0 4.B. MHFA HOUSING TRUST FUND
Support changes to MHFA's Housing Trust Fund which place
greater emphasis on large family ownership and rental
opportunities in the suburban core. Persons with incomes
up to 30 percent of median ($15,300) presently benefit
from affordable housing opportunities in other parts of
the state. A change of income limits, an increase to 50
percent of median ($25,500), would assist the HRA in the
acquisition and clearance of substandard housing and the
development of family ownership housing in cooperation
with a nonprofit housing developer such as Habitat for
Humanity.
4.C. "THIS OLD HOUSE" MODIFICATIONS
Modify the "This Old House" legislation. Richfield has
single family homes built between 1940 and 1960.
Richfield is promoting the remodeling, investment and
value added improvements to these 33 and 53 year old
homes. The present legislation caps the property tax
benefit to 50 percent of the value added improvements up
to $25,000. This deferral lasts for ten years and then is
phased out over five years. It is proposed that the full
value be deferred for five years and then phased out with
a maximum deferral of $50,000.
6
CHALLENGE 5 - NEW RESOURCES FOR VITALITY
Support a package of new and modified revenue
that resources are of a sufficient quantity to
impact on housing, redevelopment, maintenance
services in Richfield. Of particular concern
to airport operations and long range planning.
RESPONSE:
5.A. AIRPORT
sources to ensure
have a positive
and essential
are the impacts due
Support immediate mitigation of the growing pressures of
airport operations and expansion plans by securing
legislative support to:
1. HOUSING REPLACEMENT
Finance the development in Richfield of 30 homes
annually for five years as a housing replacement
resource for residents impacted by the Metropolitan
Airports Commission's acquisition program in New Ford
Town and Rich Acres neighborhoods of Richfield. It is
estimated that blighted property site assembly cost
(acquisition, relocation, demolition) followed by
coordinated development will approximate $8,964,000.
2. NOISE ABATEMENT
Finance noise abatement for housing and schools that
are located in the 1996 Ldn 65 noise contour and
eligible for the Metropolitan Airports Commission's
MSP Part 150 Airport Noise and Land Use Compatibility
Program. Funding for the program is provided by the
FAA (80 percent) and the MAC (20 percent).
Finance noise abatement for sound insulation in
schools in communities near the airport that
experience disruptive aircraft noise and are located
outside the 1996 65 Ldn noise contour. Special state
legislation is needed fund these projects because
building structures located outside the 65 Ldn noise
contour are not eligible for federal funding according
to FAA Part 150 Program guidelines.
3. OFF-SITE AIRPORT NOISE MITIGATION
During the 1992 legislative session, a bill was passed
requiring the MAC to dedicate nearly $30 million over
the next four years from Passenger Facility Charges
(PFC's) for noise mitigation projects around the
airport (State Statutes Sec. 473.661, Subd. 4). The
legislative intent of the law is to require the MAC to
7
• spend certain increasing percentage minimums of its
annual capital improvements budget for noise
mitigation in communities surrounding the airport in
addition to Part 150 funds. The additional funds
available through this bill will allow more homes and
schools to be serviced in a shorter period of time.
The Legislature should monitor the MAC's
implementation of the law to ensure adherence to its
requirements.
4. MAC COMMISSIONER TO SOLELY REPRESENT RICHFIELD
Richfield is significantly impacted by MAC activities.
Minneapolis and St. Paul have MAC representatives
selected by each city. All other appointments are
made by the Governor. It would be appropriate to
endorse legislation that would permit appointment of a
Richfield MAC representative by the City of Richfield.
5.B. REVENUES FOR REDEVELOPMENT
Support a metropolitan area-wide revenue source to finance
the redevelopment of deteriorating commercial and housing
areas.
5.C. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FEE
Support legislation which would enable the City to impose
an annual fee for community development activities. The
fee would be used for housing, neighborhood preservation
and redevelopment initiatives of the HRA.
5.D. RECREATION APPROPRIATION BONDING BILL
The City strongly supports the Department of Natural
Resources proposed capital budget which includes a request
that $7 million be appropriated for the next fiscal
biennium for outdoor recreation grants to local
governments. The Outdoor Recreation Grant Program, which
was recently transferred from the Department of Trade and
Economic Development, would administer this matching grant
program in addition to the Federal Land and Water
Conservation Grants.
8
I*• CHALLENGE 6 - RESOURCES FOR TRANSPORTATION
Richfield is significantly impacted by proposed improvements to
I-494, I-35W, 62 Crosstown and TH77. Richfield has been directly
involved with monitoring and influencing the planning for these
roadway improvements. Careful attention must be given to
balancing regional and local interest. Richfield understands
that lack of additional capacity for these roadways would likely
generate additional pollution, force more traffic onto
neighborhood streets and decrease traffic safety within the
community. However, the loss of homes and encroachment in
residential areas must be carefully considered.
RESPONSE:
T-1. HIGHWAY FUNDING
The City urges the Legislature to identify and support a
clear funding mechanism for improvements to I-35W, I-494
and TH77.
T-2. LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT (LRT)
The City urges the Legislature to oppose funding for LRT
in the I-35W corridor. It is the City's position that
the diamond lanes alternative is the most responsive
solution to the corridor's transportation needs.
T-3. HIGH SPEED BUS
Support development and funding of a comprehensive high
speed bus transit plan alternative as the most responsive
solution to the I-35W corridor's transportation needs.
This concept is consistent with the diamond lane
alternative. The concepts also provide more benefits than
LRT with less expense and can be implemented sooner.
T-4. HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES
The City urges the Legislature to support funding for the
reconstruction of the I-35W/I-494 interchange as part of
the first stage of the I-35W improvements.
T-5. MUNICIPAL STATE AID (MSA)
The City supports increasing the Municipal State Aid
system limit to 3,000 miles. The increase is necessary
to ensure that adequate funding is available to maintain
streets.
T-6. STREET UTILITY FUND
• The City supports the legislation which would permit
cities to establish the Street Utility Fund as an option
funding source for street maintenance.
9
! -.1-D
• The League of Minnesota Cities has urged the Legislature
to permit cities to create a transportation utility. Such
authorization would address:
? Reduced revenues available for local street and road
improvements.
? The benefits to all taxpayers of a properly maintained
local transportation system.
? The severe limitations of existing special assessment
authority.
T.7. DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FUNDING
The City strongly supports Demonstration Project Funding
for 77th Street. Richfield will be seeking funding
through Congressman Sabo. Support from Legislators would
be very helpful.
•
•
10
CHALLENGE 7 - COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Richfield recognizes the need to protect our fragile environment.
There are a number of issues of special concern regarding the
environment including:
RESPONSE:
7.A. WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
Minnesota Statute Chapter 509 requires Water Management
Organizations (WMOs) to prepare Water Management Plans.
Cities are then required to prepare Local Water Management
Plans. Richfield is in support of legislation to allow
cities to be the permitting authority rather than WMOs
once the cities have Local Water Management Plans
consistent with WMO plans.
7.B. HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
Richfield currently permits a system of open competition
for residential waste haulers. Our perception is that
people of Richfield believe that the current system works
well but that there is a need to increase the convenience
of household hazardous waste disposal. We also agree that
legislation should continue to fund educational and
operational pilot program efforts on the subject of solid
and hazardous waste disposal including alternatives for
the disposal of household waste such as those promoted by
the Household Hazardous Waste Reduction Project.
7.C. MANDATORY NOISE BUDGET ORDINANCE AT MSP
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is responsible
for minimizing environmental impacts from air
transportation and navigation activities on communities
near the airport. MAC announced last fall that the
aircraft noise levels at MSP were in violation of a
voluntary Noise Abatement Ordinance that was established
in 1987.
The City of Richfield requests MAC to take a more
aggressive position and adopt a mandatory Noise Budget
Ordinance that would provide more effective noise relief
to communities near the airport. The MAC has been
reluctant to enact such an ordinance at MSP. The
Legislature should require the MAC to adopt the mandatory
ordinance at MSP to ensure meaningful air noise reduction
in communities near the airport.
•
11
CHALLENGE 8 - COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE
The need to develop accountable governance systems which permit
free and open access to the political process as well as
developing affordable systems are priorities for our community.
Of special interest to Richfield are the following issues:
RESPONSE:
8.A. ELECTIONS (ABSENTEE VOTING)
The City urges adoption of the League of Minnesota Cities
recommendations for simplifying the absentee voting
process and making it easier to conduct absentee voting.
8.B. ELECTIONS (GENERAL)
The City urges the Legislature to fund the full cost of
conducting state primary, special and general elections at
the local level. The legislative reimbursement of the
1992 presidential primary election demonstrates that
cities can accurately document and account for the costs
of such election.
•
•
12
I / -0
• • CHALLENGE 9 - COMMUNITY AFFORDABILITY
There are a number of issues of particular to the City because
they affect the affordability of City services. Those include:
RESPONSE:
9.A. MANDATES
The City opposes any additional mandates. All branches of
federal and state government should adopt a policy which
requires a direct link between funding responsibility for
programs with the level of government that creates the
program. The City also urges the Legislature and the
Congress to review, repeal or revise current mandates.
9.B. PAY EQUITY
The City supports efforts to eliminate any sex based
differences in compensation to public employees but asks
the Legislature to revise the Pay Equity Statute to limit
the law's applicability to only full time employees. The
rules used to compute pay equity for seasonal and part
time employees generally do not support the basic pay
equity policy.
0 9.C,. EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
The City supports legislation promoting the efficient and
economical provision of employee benefits including life,
health and dental care. The City specifically opposes
legislation which would authorize employees or groups of
employees to unilaterally select particular care
providers. The City further asks that the Legislature not
mandate or grant additional benefits to public employees.
9.D. LOCAL POLICE AND PAID FIRE RELIEF ASSOCIATIONS
The City supports the merger of local Police and Fire
Relief Associations into PERA Police and Fire Funds under
the uniform policy enacted in the 1987 Legislature. Any
amendments to the policy should lower City consolidation
costs while fully protecting the solvency of the PERA
Police and Fire Fund.
The City supports:
? Changes in the actuarial assumptions relating to
salaries and investment return to more truly reflect
experience.
0 The City opposes:
13
I I -)q
• ? The payment of any type of bonus to active or retired
members such as the "13th Check."
? The establishment of any multiple mechanism for
inflation or post-retirement adjustments. .
9.E. INTEREST ARBITRATION
The City supports legislation which modifies the existing
interest arbitration process to require arbitrators to
give primary consideration to internal equity comparisons
and the impact of an arbitration on the personnel
compensation systems of the city involved.
9.F. WORKERS' COMPENSATION
The City supports modifications to the workers'
compensation statutes which would restrict presumptions of
occupational disease to apply only after an employee can
establish an absence of personal risk factors that could
have caused the disease or illness. The law now allows
for the legal presumption that Police and Fire personnel
contract certain diseases or illnesses due to their
employment. Employers must then rebut the presumption by
introduction of evidence. The burden is difficult and
increases the chance that employees receive compensation
for non-work related illness and disease.
Currently, the law provides the following presumptions for
the following personnel:
Police and Fire: Myocarditis, Coronary Sclerosis,
Pneumonia or its sequel, and infections
or communicable disease (exposures
outside of a hospital) and for Fire
only - cancer.
All of the listed diseases or illnesses are common to the
entire population and an equal or greater correlation may
exist between the specific illness and the individual's
personal risk factor such as smoking, diet, exercise,
heredity and life styles and the correlation between the
job and the illness.
9.G. VETERAN'S PREFERENCE
The City supports amending the Veteran's Preference Act to
provide that a veteran must select one and only one
hearing procedure under a grievance procedure within a
collective bargaining agreement.
The City supports clarifying the Civil Service Statute,
specifically removing medical disability suspension,
demotion and termination actions from Civil Service
Commission authority.
14
j ? -t !5-
o 9.H. LIQUOR ISSUES
The City strongly opposes the establishment of one class
of beer and the offsale of wine in other than liquor
stores. The establishment of one class of beer in
Minnesota would cause substantial problems in controlling
the sale of beer in filling stations, grocery stores, drug
stores and elsewhere where 3.2 beer is now sold.
9.1. TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
The City recommends that the Legislature reinstate the
previous definition of employees covered by PELRA to
employees who are employed for more than 100 working days
in a calendar year. This is very important to the
operation of City services. The current legislative
language is confusing. Reestablishing the previous
language which would provide 100 working days instead of
the 100 calendar days would greatly improve Richfield's
ability to provide services to the community and would not
encourage the inappropriate use of seasonal workers. Many
of the workers used for these programs are students. The
100 calendar day limitation does not accurately reflect
the time that many of these workers have available to
serve the community.
9.J. ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR DNR TRANSACTIONS
The City urges an increase in the administrative fee
(deputy registrar fee) for processing Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) boat and snowmobile transactions
be enacted. The current fee of 500 per transaction has
not been changed since 1971 and does not cover the
administrative cost of providing the service.
9.K. WORTHLESS CHECKS
The City urges the Legislature to support worthless check
legislation. In the past, legislation has been introduced
but never passed which would provide that any person who
pays for a driver's license with a bad check shall have
their driver's license revoked. If a person pays for
license plates with a bad check, their motor vehicle
registration certificate would be revoked. And finally,
if a person would pay for a certificate of title with a
bad check, the certificate of title would be revoked.
When the liability on a bad check is discharged or payment
made, the Department of Public Safety would reinstate the
person's driver's license, motor vehicle registration
certificate or motor vehicle certificate of title upon
payment of a $20 fee. The City of Richfield each year is
burdened with making good on bad checks that are paid for
motor vehicle registration license fees.
15
? 0 0 9.L. POLICE MINORITY RECRUITMENT
7?
t
9.M.
9.N.
The City urges the Legislature to provide funding for
cities like Richfield to establish a cooperative "cadet"
program. The program would recruit minorities out of high
school, provide them with law enforcement training and
provide a subsistence type of income for them while they
were in the training program. The goal would be to hire
the minority candidates for police positions in the
participating communities upon the completion of the
training.
CRIME PREVENTION
Violence is increasing in urban areas and throughout the
United States. While the police continue to respond and
provide a number of programs, Richfield is stretched to
the limit. The solution to this and other crime programs
is prevention education. Furthermore, crime is mobile:
many crimes are not committed by persons from Richfield.
Because of this, it is not a Richfield problem but the
state's. Therefore, the Legislature should provide for
innovative programs that will give Richfield and other
communities the resources necessary to educate our
citizens on good crime prevention and safety awareness
programs.
STATE BUILDING PERMIT SURCHARGE
Prior to 1991, cities collected a one-half percent
surcharge on all building permits which were sent into the
state. However, a large portion of that was returned to
the local governments.
Since 1991, the Governor, as part of his budget balancing
bill, kept all surcharge monies collected by local
governments to help fund the Building Codes Division of
the State Department of Administration. This resulted in
Richfield losing between $5,000 and $10,000 annually.
Richfield supports the LMC initiative to restore the
excess fees generated by the surcharge which exceed the
costs of the State Building Code Division to local
governments.
16
f®
? 00
M
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 45
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Appointments of?persons to various Advisory Boards and
Commissions.
Background:
Several terms of City Board and Commission Members expire on
January 31, 1994. In addition, some Commissions have vacancies
resulting from resignations. Vacancies were advertised in the
Richfield Sun Current.
Applicants were interviewed on January 6, 7 and 14, 1994.,
Recommended Motion:
Appoint persons to fill the terms on the various Boards and
Commissions.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. Terms of several Board and Commission Members expire on
January 31, 1994.
2. In order to assure quorums for future meetings, appointments
should be made at this time.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Defer appointments to a later Council meeting.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is placed on the January 24, 1994 Council agenda for
Council consideration. Appointments will begin immediately.
ully submitted,
Jame. Prosser
City nager
JDP:ds
•
1Q-1
i•
. a?
U
O
ro
U
ro
O
W +?
H ?
U (1)
b
U +?
? U
N
O N
H ?
0 a
N
O N (A
U •rl 4-)
U C
O a)
rob
U O
ro +?
> N
O
1 44
x5
A ai
?i 4-)
W
x s4
(a
O >1
A r-I
a
O E
GO fa
a?
>4 4-)
a
o s?
wro
a >"
PC M
n N N N N N m m r- ?o N N N N
O% OA ON ON ON 01 ON ON ON ON ON ON 01 ON
m m m m m m m 0 ON ON ON C7% ON ON
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
?
O
ro ?
O
ro O
O
ro O
O
ro O
C
ro O
O
ro ?
O
ro ?
O
ro ?
O
ro 7
O
ro O
O
ro O
O
ro ?
O
ro O
G
ro
h h h h h h h h h h h h h h
4.) 4J
O O
O a)
O ?
? 4-)
U) W
a)
U
O
ro
U
ro
>
N
z
0
H
H
U
w
U
N ?
>
a a?
w 4-)
(a k
a ca
N >1
UM
E
a)
b
a?
a
x
a)
N
.H
U
ro
U
ro
10
z
O
H
in
N
O
U
W
U
H
>
a
W
W ?
H
>4 a?
E 4-)
zN
E>,
UM
JD--??
00
7??
•
!\ C- I\ M 0 C- r- E- r ? I\ 0 to
ON rn a+ rn rn rn 0% ON ON ON rn rn ON
m 0 0 m m ON rn m m m ON m ON
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
M M M M M M M M M M M M M
> > >' > >
? 4
f 7
f
N
f
I 1
?I
f-I
?I
I
S 1
S-I 1
t-I
I
ro ro ro ?
ro -1
ro ro -
ro ro ro ro -
ro ro ro
ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro ro
h h h h h h h h h h h h h
ro
a?
U
ro
u
ro
s~
a)
N
N
U
.-I
a
U ?
?b
U ?
roro
D
H
M 0
44
I
zP
O a)
H 4J
W
w?
H ro
E?
O
U r-I
W
E E
x $4
a)
H ?
a
?4
ro
>Y
M
r. r.
CD b
U) C/)
v ..
a)
U
f~
ro
U
ro
M
I
z
O
H
H
O E
U S4
a)
G +-)
z
H f-I
ro
>'1
aM
ro
a?
U
ro
U
ro
a)
b
0
4J
w
N
N
a
.ro
?0
(0 4.)
U UI
0
CO 4.1
I E
z a?
O4-)
H
In p
rA ro
H Q)
O •-I
U
E
E N
H a)
U +?
a?
E4 a)
V1 >1
H
w M
? C
b b
0
N N
?• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 44
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Authorizing repayment of Metropolitan Right-of-Way Acquisition
Loan Fund (RALF Loan Program) for acquisitions for the 77th
Street Reconstruction Project.
Background:
The Twin Cities Metropolitan Council operates the Metropolitan
Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF). The RALF loan program
provides temporary funds to acquire certain owner-occupied,
single-family homes for public right-of-way for a planned highway
improvement. The RALF;loans may be used for such purchases where
the sellers are experiencing a hardship, as defined by the
program. Once the local government unit obtains permanent
funding for the road improvement, the RALF loans are repaid to
the program.
The City of Richfield was one of the first units of government to
use RALF funds. Beginning in 1990, the City used RALF funds to
acquire seven homes of residents who experienced .a qualified
hardship situation. These families could not wait, for the
federal government to approve federal highway funds to be used-to
acquire right-of-way for the 77th Street project. The total
amount of RALF loan funds used was,S705,305.99.
After the City acquired these seven homes, officials of the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) determined that the
acquisitions had not received prior approval. Therefore, the
FHWA ruled that the acquisition of the seven homes was not
eligible for federal highway funds
Since that decision, the City has signed a Cooperative Agreement
dated October 25, 1993, with the Minnesota Department of,
Transportation. Under the terms of that agreement, MnDOT agreed
to contribute 75% of the RALF loans which are ineligible for
federal funds. The City is-responsible for the remaining .?5-%,
portion of the loans which are ineligible for federal funding.
The City portion of the RALF repayment will be paid using the
City's Municipal State Aid Streets (MSA) fund which is derived
from gas tax revenues.
Under the t
retire the
and Federal
state funds
January 6,
necessary.
0
erms of the RALF.l.oans,_the City
seven RALF loans. within 30'days
right-of-way funds,.for.the 77th
under the cooperative agreement
1994. Thus action to repay the
is obligated. to.
of receipt. of State
Street.project:
were received on
RALF loans is now
9I
Recommended Motion:
Authorize appropriate City officials to repay, using 25$
•? Municipal State Aid funds and 75% State trunk highway funds
received as part of the October 25, 1993 cooperative agreement,
the $705,305.99 RALF loans used for the 77th Street project. . .
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Cooperative Agreement with MnDOT dated October 25, 1993
provides for 75% of the funds needed to repay the RALF loan.
2. The remaining 25% of the RALF loan will be paid using the
City's Municipal State Aid Streets funds (gas tax revenues).
3. Under, the terms of the RALF loans, the City is obligated to
retire the seven RALF loans within 30 days of receipt of
State and Federal funds for the 77th Street project. The
State funds were received on January 6, 1994.
4. The RALF loans assisted seven families who were experiencing
hardship as a result of the City's 77th Street project.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
M
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A decision is needed at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting so
that the City can retire the seven RALF loans used to advance the
77th Street project prior to February 6, 1994.
Resp f ly.submitted,
l
James Prosser
City kanager
JDP:ds
0
9_a-
?
f
r
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 258
Agenda October 8, 1990
opt ori`:of teso-lution-authorizing---the •submftta? lal si nary
'loan --eppl3cetion for- the ` 15Ufth&id of `_&6per'tV!W"645
T,"tlakl-and -Axfahue.'t
Sackground•
The City Council has approved the official map which calls for
the upgrading of 77th Street between 135W and TH77. The
upgrading will necessitate the purchase of property. At the
present, the timing of the construction of these improvements is
uncertain; however, people who own and reside in these homes
must continue to make decisions about their lives. In some
instances, these people must sell their home; but the pending
project makes it impossible to sell. Buyers do not want to
purchase uncertainty. To meet this need, the Metropolitan
Council has established the Right-Of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund
(RALF). The fund is designed to permit cities to purchase owner-
occupied dwellings when continued ownership of the property would
be a hardship for the owner. The loan bears no interest. A loan
would be equal to the value of the real estate, plus relocation
benefits minus the salvage value of the houses. The city would
pay back the loan when funding for the 77th Street project became
available.
The process for securing a loan is generally as follows. After
the owner of a'property has listed it for sale-for a period of at
least 90 days, a preliminary application is submitted to the
Metropolitan Council. The attached resolution is part of the
preliminary application. The Metropolitan Council then reviews
the preliminary application. If the preliminary application is
approved, negotiations for the purchase of the property may
commence and a loan agreement with Metropolitan Council must be
drafted.
Staff has been working with the owner of the property at 7645
Oakland Avenue which appears to qualify for RALF. The property
has been listed with a realtor. The 90 day listing period has
ended. Potential purchasers looked at the property but when told
of the pending street project lost interest.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution which authorizes staff to proceed
with the filing of a preliminary RALF application.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City Council has approved the official map for
upgrading 77th Street.
2. The upgrading will require the purchase of the property.
9-3
3. The city has no funds currently available to.purchase this
• property.
4. The Metropolitan Council operates RALF and has previously
approved the purchase of two properties under the program.
5. The owner of the subject property appears to have an
eligible hardship and has been unable to sell the home
during the 90 day listing period.
6. The City Council, during deliberations on the 77th Street
project, indicated they would assist property owners in
minimizing the difficulties this project imposed on them.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Refuse to authorize the application.
2. Delay action until a future date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
While the RALF program provides assistance, it does not provide
immediate relief. Staff has been working with this owner since
May. It will likely require an additional two to three months to
complete the process. Action to adopt the resolution on October
6 would facilitate the processing.
JDP:ds
Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City nager
0
• RESOLUTION NO.
THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING LOAN APPLICATION
FOR ACQUISITION OF 77TH STREET RIGHT-OF-MAY;
7645 OAKLAND AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has adopted an official map
for improvements to 77th Street;
WHEREAS, the improvements to 77th Street necessitate the
purchase of real estate including the property at 7645 Oakland
Avenue south;
WHEREAS, city funds are presently not available for purchase
of real estate;
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council under Minnesota Statute
473.167, Subd. 2 a. administers the Right-Of-Way Acquisition Loan
Fund (RALF) to acquire properties so situated with owners who are
experiencing a hardship;
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has indicated that RALF
monies would be made available for the purchase of "hardship
alb properties" along 77th Street;
WHEREAS, the owner of this property may qualify for purchase
under the hardship provisions of RALF.
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED by the City council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota, that the City Manager submit an
application to the Metropolitan Council under the RALF program
for purposes of initiating the process which may result in the
acquisition of the property at 7645 Oakland Avenue South.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this Sth day of October, 1990.
Steven J. Quam, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
0
8
. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.43
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Request for approval of the South Hennepin Regional Planning
Agency's (SHeRPA) 1994 Work Plan proposal.
Background:
For the past two years, SHeRPA has been gathering information
about the demographic, social and economic makeup of the region,
and the social service system. The results of this effort are
two studies. One study offers an analysis of historical census
data to identify demographic, social and economic trends
impacting South Hennepin communities. The other study surveyed
all human.service providers serving the South Hennepin area. A
supplemental study was also done to analyze the impact of
demographic, social and economic trends on child care needs.
Two trends are evident from these studies: 1) families with
children have needs; and 2) the social service system, as it is
currently operating is fragmented, specialized and difficult to
understand. -Consequently, the major initiatives for 1994 will be
families, children and access to and coordination of services.
• The State of Minnesota has been funding planning and development
of integrated services to better serve families and children
through legislation such as that which deals with learning
readiness. The purpose of this kind of legislation is to spur
systematic changes in the delivery system which reflect the
unique needs of local communities. Minnesota is therefore
providing planning grants to local and regional collaborative
initiatives. The South Hennepin communities received a $90,000
grant for 1994, to create a plan for integrated services for
families and children in South Hennepin. This will be the focus
of work plan activities for 1994.
SHeRPA will assume the role of facilitator for this work plan
activity. Other 1994 proposed work plan activities include the
maintenance and improvement of databases of demographic and
provider information; ongoing activities involving participation
of citizens in deciding human service priorities; coordinating
South Hennepin Emergency Services Program, and organizational
development.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the 1994 South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency Work
Plan.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The 1994 Work Plan proposal accurately identifies human
ID service issues which Richfield and other SHeRPA members have
identified as priorities.
R-J
• 2. As a joint venture, the Work Plan will allow Richfield and
SHeRPA members to work cooperatively, empowering individuals
to identify their needs and use resources in the community to
their benefit.
Alternative Recommendation :
Deny the Work Plan proposal on the basis it does not reflect the
needs of Richfield and South Hennepin Communities.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action of this time would help facilitate SHeRPA schedule.
Resp lly submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
0
Ll
•
SOUTH HENNEPIN
REGIONAL PLANNING
AGENCY
FOR HUMAN SERVICES
C?L
Submitted to:
City Council
of
Richfield
Date: January, 1994
Board of Directors
Mark Bernhardson, Bloomington
Carl Jullie, Eden Prairie
James Prosser, Richfield
Kenneth Rosland, Edina, Chair
Jeanne Massey, Staff
Regional Citizens Advisory. Commission
Bloomington
Elaine Hartmann
Charles Schuler
Roberta Zanko
Eden Prairie
Bette Anderson, Chair
Peg DuBord
Martin Jessen
Edina
Nancy Atchison
Betsy Flaten
Glenn Smith
Richfield
John Boyle
Camillo DeSantis
Susan Rosenberg
City Staff Liaison Committee
Diane Anastos; Richfield
Lorinda Pearson, Bloomington
Natalie Swaggert, Eden Prairie
Susan Wohlrabe, Edina
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
8-3
WORK PLAN CONTENTS
Mission of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency ......................... 2
Outline of 1994 Program Areas and Goals ................................................. 2
1994 Goals and Objectives .......................................................................... 3
Research, Planning and Coordination ...................................................... 4
Citizen Participation ................................................................................ 6
Emergency Services Program .................................................................. 7
Organizational Development and Administration .................................... 7
Special Projects for Member Cities . ........................................................ 9
Organizational Chart .................................................................................. Appendix
•
r1
LJ
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
9.- q
MISSION
The mission of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency (SHeRPA) is to work cooperatively with
others toward creating an environment in which individuals are empowered to identify their needs and use
the resources in the community to their benefit, and to assure that the human service needs of South
Hennepin County residents are identified through the use of research and planning and, where possible, met
through the coordination of service providers.
SHeRPA is a joint powers agreement between the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina and Richfield.
The organization is a vehicle through which the four cities can cooperatively plan for human services in the
region. As an intergovernmental organization, all of SHeRPA's research, planning and coordination
activities are jointly decided upon and implemented.
1994 PROGRAM AREAS AND GOALS
RESEARCH, PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Goal 1: Coordinate the development of innovative models for the deliver}, of family and children
services in South Hennepin.
Goal 2: Serve as a vehicle through which the four communities in South Hennepin can plan and
coordinate human services on a regional level. Provide advice and guidance to member cities,
providers, Hennepin County, United Way and other human services organizations in deciding human
services policies and programs in South Hennepin.
41 Goal 3: Be a primary information resource for policy making and the planning and coordination of
human services.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
Goal 4: Serve as a vehicle for citizen participation in determining the ongoing human service priorities
in South Hennepin, and increase community involvement in determining human service priorities-by
expanding and improving the citizen participation process.
EMERGENCY SERVICES PROGRAM
Goal 5: Assist emergency service agencies to provide effective emergency services to people in
financial need in South Hennepin and evaluate future role of SHeRPA as coordinating agency of the
program.
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
Goal 6: Determine short- and long-term priorities and strategies for SHeRPA.
Goal 7: Ensure continued growth and strengthening of SHeRPA's Board and Advisory Commission.
Goal S: Increase community awareness of SHeRPA's mission and activities.
Goal 9: Continue or establish new administrative policies and procedures necessary to support the
Agency's mission and goals.
SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR MEMBER CITIES
• Goal 10: Assist the four member cities with special research and planning projects as requested.
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
9
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MIMNESOTA
Council Letter No. 44
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Authorizing repayment of Metropolitan Right-of-Way Acquisition
Loan Fund (RALF Loan Program) for acquisitions for the 77th
Street Reconstruction Project.
Background:
The Twin Cities Metropolitan Council operates the Metropolitan
Right-of-Way Acquisition Loan Fund (RALF). The RALF loan program
provides temporary funds to acquire certain owner-occupied,
single-family homes for public right-of-way for a planned highway
improvement. The RALF loans may be used for such purchases where
the sellers are experiencing a hardship, as defined by the
program. Once the local government unit obtains permanent
funding for the road improvement, the RALF loans are repaid to
the program.
The City of. Richfield was one of the first units of government to
use RALF funds. Beginning in 1990, the City used RALF funds to
acquire seven homes of residents who experienced a qualified
hardship situation. These families could not wait for the
federal government to approve federal highway funds to be used to
acquire right-of-way for the 77th Street project. The total
amount of RALF loan funds used was $705,305.99.
After the City acquired these seven homes, officials of the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) determined that the
acquisitions had not received prior approval. Therefore, the
FHWA ruled that the acquisition of the seven homes was not
eligible for federal, highway funds.
Since that decision, the City has signed a Cooperative Agreement,
dated October 25, 1993, with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation. Under the terms of that agreement, MnDOT agreed
to contribute 75% of the RALF loans which are ineligible for
federal funds. The City is responsible for the remaining 25%
portion of the loans which are ineligible for federal funding.
The City portion of the RALF repayment will be paid using the
City's Municipal State Aid Streets (MSA) fund_ which is derived
from gas tax revenues.
Under the terms of the RALF loans; the City is obligated to
retire the seven RALF loans within 30 days of receipt of State
and Federal right-of-way-funds for the 77th Street project.
State funds under the cooperative agreement were received on
January 6, 1994. Thus action to repay the RALF loans is now
necessary.
4-I
• Recommended Motion:
Authorize appropriate City officials to repay, using 25%
Municipal State Aid funds and 75% State trunk highway funds
received as part of the October 25, 1993 cooperative agreement,
the $705,305.99 RALF loans used for the 77th Street project.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Cooperative Agreement with MnDOT dated October 25, 1993
provides for 75% of the funds needed to repay the RALF loan.
2. The remaining 25% of the RALF loan will be paid using the
City's Municipal State Aid Streets funds (gas tax revenues).
3. Under the terms of the RALF loans, the City is obligated to
retire the seven RALF loans within 30 days of receipt of
State and Federal funds for the 77th Street project. The
State funds were received on January 6, 1994.
4. The RALF loans assisted seven families who were experiencing
hardship as a result of the City's 77th Street project.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
A decision is needed at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting so
w that the City can retire the seven RALF loans used to advance the
77th Street project prior to February 6, 1994.
Resp f ly submitted,
James Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
0
g- g
. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
GOAL 4: Serve as a vehicle for citizen participation in determining the ongoing human
service priorities in the South Hennepin region. Increase community
involvement in determining human service priorities by expanding and
improving the citizen participation process.
BACKGROUND
One of SHeRPA's primary philosophies is to involve citizens and users of services in determining human
service priorities and how services get provided. SHeRPA's planning and coordination activities involve
citizen's participation through the Advisory Commission and subcommittees of the Commission. SHeRPA
also coordinates an annual citizen's participation process as mandated through the CSSA (Community
Social Services Act) to gain citizen's input on the delivery of social services. Citizen's input is gained in
many ways, including focus groups, surveys and task forces. SHeRPA both sponsors these activities
directly and encourages input from focus groups and other activities sponsored by the cities, providers and
other community-based organizations. The recommendations resulting from the citizen's input are
submitted to Hennepin County staff and Board of Commissioners.
In addition to coordinating the ongoing involvement of citizens in the planning of human services, SHeRPA
has a consumer and provider advisory committee for mental health concerns. The Committee was created
at the request of Hennepin County about five years ago. In 1994, SHeRPA will be evaluating the role of
the Committee and its effectiveness as a means of citizen input on mental health issues.
OBJECTIVES TIME
FRAME
? As part of the Family Services Collaborative Initiative. coordinate a series of
focus groups to determine needs of families and children (see Goal 1). Jan.-July 94
? Involve the participation and leadership of South Hennepin citizens in the Family
Services Collaborative Initiative (see Goal 1). Jan.-Dec. 94
? Provide Hennepin County staff and Board of Commissioners Avith citizen's
recommendations regarding community service priorities. The reconunendations
will be based on focus groups and other means of citizen input coordinated by
SHeRPA, member cities, or other organizations. The reconunendations will
include the findings of the needs assessment conducted for the Family Services
Collaborative Initiative. May-Dec. 94
? Explore ways of providing technical assistance to member cities, providers and
other community groups on how to use citizens and consumers in planning human
service programs. Undetermined
? Create a subcommittee of the Advisory Commission to review the current CSSA .
citizen participation process used by Hennepin County and make
reconunendations to Hennepin County and Board of Commissioners on how to Jan.-June 94
improve it.
•
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
6
1994 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
RESEARCH PLANNING AND COORDINATION
GOAL 1: To coordinate the development of innovative models for the delivery of
family and children services in South Hennepin.
BACKGROUND
In the spring of 1993, after months of gathering input from citizens in the four communities, the SHeRPA
Board and Advisory Commission determined priority issue areas for SHeRPA's 1994 Work Plan. The
three main priority areas were families and youth, coordination and access to services, and transportation.
In the fall of 1993. SHeRPA submitted a proposal for a planning grant to the State of Minnesota which
would allow us to address all of these priorities. The grant, in the amount of $90,000, will fund the
development of a plan for redesigning school and social services to better serve families and children.
The vision for a 'redesigned' service system is not defined and is to be determined by the local communities
during the planning process. The principles upon which the vision of an integrated service system will be
premised are to:
• be family focused and culturally relevant,
• empower families and involve their direct participation in decision and policy making,
• be comprehensive and provide a continuum of services,
• be community-based and accessible,
• be outcome based and focus on prevention and early intervention,
• be driven by families' needs, not those of providers and fenders,
• build on strengths and resources of families and communities.
The planning will be a regional collaborative effort among consumers, providers, the schools, religious
organizations and other institutions involved in the lives of families and children. SHeRPA will be the lead
coordinating agency for the planning process. SHeRPA is also the lead coordinating agency for another
smaller, but related, planning effort to integrate services for youth in Bloomington and Richfield.
OBJECTIVE
TIME
FRAME
? Lead the coordination of a I amily Services Collaborative, which will involve
identifying needs and resources, creating a collaborative dccision-making body, and
designing a plan for integrated family services. Two additional FTE staff will be
hired in 1994 with the planning funds to assist in the research and coordination of Jan.-Dec. 94
? Use demographic and provider studies completed by SHeRPA in 1993 as primary
sources of information to guide decision making during the planning process of the
Pamily Services Collaborative Initiative. Prepare summary report profiling the
demographic, social and economic characteristics of families and children, and the
services available to meet family needs in South Hennepin. Jan.-Dec. 94
? Incorporate the Integrated Youth Services Initiative into the larger family services
collaborative. Jan.-Oct. 94
0
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
S- ?
• ? Facilitate networking and coordination among the various "integrated service
collaborations" in South Hennepin, including the South Hennepin Interagency
Early Learning and Development and the Children's Local Mental Health
Collaborative initiative
GOAL 2: Serve as a vehicle through which the four communities in South Hennepin
can plan and coordinate human services on a regional level, and provide
advice and guidance to member cities, providers, Hennepin County, United
Way and other human services organizations in deciding human services
policies and programs in South Hennepin.
Ongoing
BACKGROUND
•
One of the primary functions of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency is to be a vehicle through
which the four communities in South Hennepin can plan and coordinate human services on a regional level.
As a four city agency, SHeRPA assists member cities and other governmental and provider organizations
in detennining human service policy and programming in the south Hennepin region. In this role, SHeRPA
is often requested to participate on committees and task forces formed to evaluate human service needs and
make recommendations for policy and services impacting the region. For example, in 1992, SHeRPA
participated on the task force formed to assess the need for a Loaves and Fishes program in South
Hennepin and, in 1993, on the Hennepin County Adolescent Health Care Task Force and the Bloomington
Family Self-Sufficiency Committee. Member cities may also consult with SHeRPA regarding human
service related issues in their particular cities. or ask us to participate on their RFP (Request For Proposal)
committees which decide the finding of social services for the cities.
OBJECTIVES
? Continue to serve on the RFP (Request For Proposal) committees of the member
cities which determine city funding for human services.
? Serve on human service related task forces and committees determined as
priorities by the Advisory Commission and Board of Directors, including United
Way's Planning and Research Committee.
? Inform Hennepin County of human service priorities in South Hennepin as
determined by citizen participation, needs assessments and service evaluations
conducted by SHcRPA, member cities, and other organizations in the South
Hennepin region.
? Provide consultation to member cities, Hennepin County, providers and other
organizations regarding human services related issues in South Hennepin.
TIME
FRAME
July-Aug. 94
Unknown
Ongoing
As needed
•
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
4
GOAL 3: To be a primary information resource for policy making and the planning
and coordination of human services.
BACKGROUND
In 1992 and 1993, SHeRPA undertook two comprehensive studies, a demographic trends study of the four
communities in South Hennepin and a survey of human service providers serving people living in South
Hennepin. The 1994 Work Plan includes time to present the findings of these studies and develop updated
reports.
In addition, the work plan includes time to use, maintain and expand the databases created as part of the
studies. One of the main objectives of the two studies was to create active databases of demographic and
provider information which would be used in policy making and planning for human services. The
databases will be used by the four member cities and the various organizations dealing with human
services, including providers, businesses, schools, Hennepin County, other planning agencies, and other
interested organizations. The database of providers and services will not be used as.an information and
referral source for people seeking services.
OBJECTIVES TIME
FRAME
? Make presentations to member cities on the findings of the demographic trends and
provider studies. Jan.-Feb. 94
? Make presentations to other interested organizations on the findings of the To be
• demographic trends and provider studies. scheduled
? Develop and disseminate an informational brochure on the availability of data
through the demographic and service provider databases and how to use them. Jan. 94
? Maintain the database of service providers by updating it with changes in the
delivery of services. Available resources include First Call for Help, Minnesota
Council on nonprofits, other resource directories and first- hand knowledge. Ongoing
O Maintain the database of demographic data through census updates. Ongoing
? Conduct a survey of human services provided by religious organizations and add to
database of providers. Jan.-June 94
? Develop a resource guide or interactive data base of service providers for member
cities, other policy makers and providers and funders of services. Jan.-July 94
? Respond to requests for demographic and service provider information which
would be used in policy making and program development. The data bases will not
be used as an I & R resource. As needed
? Provide update report on social health statistics, demographics and changes in the
delivery of social services in South Hennepin. Nov. 94
0
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
g-9
• ? Continue to support the South Hennepin Mental Health Advisory Committee, but
evaluate the role and strengths and weakness' of the South Hennepin Mental
Health Advisory Committee of SHeRPA. Make recommendations for any
necessary changes. Jan.-June 94
EMERGENCY SERVICES PROGRAM
•
0
GOAL 5: Assist emergency service agencies to provide effective emergency services to
people in financial need in South Hennepin and evaluate future role of
SHeRPA as coordinating agency of the program.
BACKGROUND
For more than ten vears, SHeRPA has been the coordinating. and fiscal agent for the South Hennepin
Emergency Services Program in Hennepin County. Four providers in the region (VEAP, Cornerstone,
PROP and Colonial Church) provide the service directly to clients. Over the past three years, the demand
for emergency services (primarily rent assistance) has grown rapidly and is currently overwhelming the
capacity of the four providers, particularly in Bloomington and Richfield. In addition, the program has
expanded, with additional direct service dollars for homeless families, and the coordination of the program
has become more complex. For these reasons, in late 1993, SHeRPA began to evaluate ways to increase
the capacity of providers to meet the growing'demand for services and to evaluate the role of SHeRPA as
coordinating and fiscal agent for the program. SHeRPA also applied for, but did not receive, Hennepin
County funds in 1994 to increase intake staff for the program. SHeRPA will continue to evaluate the
Emergency Services Program in early 1994 and make recommendations for changes.
OBJECTIVES
? Evaluate options to improve the delivery of the Emergency Services Program in
South Hennepin. Make reconunendations for necessary changes.
? Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of SHeRPA's role as coordinator of the
Emergency Services Program and explore the possibility of spinning off part or all
of the coordination responsibilities. Make reconunendations for necessary changes.
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
GOAL 6: Determine short- and long-term priorities for SHeRPA.
OBJECTIVES
? Facilitate a planning process among member cities to determine SHeRPA's next
work plan priorities.
? Begin a strategic planning process to determine SHeRPA's long-range priorities
and strategies.
? Develop a process for responding to emerging and/or crisis planning and
coordination issues.
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
7
TIME
FRAME
Jan.-Mar. 94
Jan.-July 94
TIME .
FRAME
Undetermined
Sept.-Dec. 94
Undetermined
• GOAL 7: Ensure continued growth and strengthening of SHeRPA's Board and
Advisory Commission.
OBJECTIVES TIME
FRAME
? Provide orientation for new Advison, Commission members. Mar. 94
? Hold a joint meeting between Board and Advisory Commission to evaluate
SHeRPA's successes and areas of needed improvement. Do this in conjunction
with the long-range strategic planning outlined in Goal 6. Sept. 94
? Actively promote diversity that reflects the diversity of South Hennepin
Comununities on SHeRPA's Advisory Commission and subcommittees of the Ongoing
Advisory Commission.
? Continue to evaluate policies and procedures of the Advisory Commission and
make recommendations for any necessary changes. Ongoing
? Provide monthly update reports to the SHeRPA Board and Advisory
Continission on kcy SHeRPA activities and new developments. Monthly
U
•
? Consider holding a special event for recognizing volunteer efforts of SHeRPA's
advisory connmission and committees. May 94
GOAL 8: Increase community awareness of SHeRPA's mission and activities.
OBJECTIVES
? Develop and disseminate a report on SHeRPA's 1993 activities.
? Convene a meeting of policy makers, city commissioners, providers and other
interested organizations to share findings of demographic and provider studies
? Maintain and develop communication xvith Hennepin County; State and regional
government organizations, providers serving South Hennepin and community
organizations.
? Develop and distribute a revised agency brochure.
TIME
FRAME
Mar.-Apr. 94
Mar./Apr. 94
Ongoing
Sept.-Oct. 94
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
8
. GOAL 9: Continue or establish new administrative policies and procedures necessary
to support the agency's mission and goals.
OBJECTIVES TIME
FRAME
? Continue annual budget planning and reporting process. Ongoing
? Hire two additional FTE staff for research and coordination for the Family
Services Collaborative Initiative. Jan. 94
? Evaluate the need for additional staff, computer and equipment upgrades, and other
agency resources in accordance with SHeRPA goals and 199 work plan. Make
necessary funding recommendations. Ongoing
SPECIAL PROJECTS FOR MEMBER CITIES
GOAL 10: Assist the four member cities with special research and planning projects as
requested.
.BACKGROUND
Upon request by any of the four member cities, SHeRPA may contract to undertake a special research or
planning project above and beyond the current work plan. These activities are funded by the city making
the request above and beyond the normal contract we have with the city. Typically additional staff are
hired to undertake the project. In 1993, SHeRPA conducted a survey for the Housing and Redevelopment
Authorities of Richfield and Bloomington of the human service needs of residents receiving Section 8
Housing Assistance.
There are currently no requests from the cities.
C
Approved by Board of Directors 12/16/93
9
Appendix
LJ
H
Z
a
L
Li
'W
a
z
g
CL
a
0
W
Z
W
Z
Z
H
0
h
0
co
a
y ? O
U
E C MC 2 CC -5 E
O O C
0,0 E O
ppww U a
C o m 0
O N .
d3°c N
c
cv ca c
>
a
?
V) M
JZtno o'=
e
v 'b
n
g
?.
c e
o ea ?
F4 y
cv
n
3 c •=
.N
_ Q
CD y 5
C y
O ca O
ea j
,
to
v o c c
c 'E co
CL
rn -0
6 <
(D 0
= C
o cog h c=o
cc Z ?i
° b
p a O U C eel env
M> (D
-5CO
o
..y., y U
0.4
°
N N U
N C
m C C
LS. O cc
Q f0 E 'p O Q_
d C U
LL
°
C m O
a
c
N
cu (D rcEv°i ??yC
U y G
wzmt9 w 0CO v
c .4
o ?
C `
2 G C
0
°"
E.
O
`° °
v
a E 3$
a? F
0
mcl)N
c N
rM CD
cv-0 0 V) °
=
=
(n Cc
(D
CL Q
c
0
? c
^?
O c
°s o c)
'D a 0 m
a
? N CH
Co w0w wma?
a
a
?O
A
1?
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 42
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Continuation of consideration of a petition to rezone land at
6438 and 6444 First Avenue.
Background:
On September 28, 1993, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing to consider the rezoning of 6438 and 6444 First Avenue
from R (residential) to C-2 (general commercial). The rezoning,
in conjunction with an off-street parking permit, would permit
Norwest Bank, 6445 Nicollet, to expand parking and modify the
drive-up teller. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to
recommend approval of the.rezoning petition.
On November 8, 1993, the Council held a public hearing on the
rezoning petition, and directed staff to draft a proposed
resolution with findings of fact to support denial of the
rezoning petition. Such resolution was presented to the Council
on November 22, 1993 (see Attachment One).
On November 22, 1993, the Council did not take action on the
proposed resolution to deny the rezoning, but rather continued
consideration of the rezoning petition until January 24, 1994.
The purpose for the continuance was to allow time for the
applicant to meet with the neighborhood and explore site plan
options to satisfy their concerns.
On January 19, 1994, the applicant submitted a revised site plan
which reverses the position of the drive-up teller facility and
parking area. The drive-up would no longer be located on the
lots to be rezoned. A median would also be installed on 65th
Street to channel traffic back to Nicollet Avenue. Residential
street medians are opposed by staff because of snow plowing and
street maintenance difficulties. Landscape screening would
remain essentially the same as previously proposed (see
Attachment Two).
Recommended Motion:
Give consideration to the rezoning of 6438 and 6444 First Avenue
from R (residence) to C-2 (general commercial).
Any motion to approve the rezoning should include findings of
fact supporting the rezoning; as well as consideration of off-
street parking permit approval. Regarding off-street parking
permit approval, the November 8, 1993 Council Letter (No. 312)
recommended approval with stipulations regarding a restrictive
covenant, directional signage, and cash escrow agreement for
landscape improvements.
Any motion to deny the rezoning should include findings of fact
to deny the rezoning.
1'?
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Council has directed that this matter be reviewed at this
meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Continue the rezoning petition to a future Council meeting.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City Council will consider the rezoning petition at their
January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
Respect ully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City anager
JDP:ds
C
0
"ATTACHMENT ONE"
RESOLUTION NO. _
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE REZONING OF LAND
WHEREAS, on August 2, 1993, Norwest Bank (6445 Nicollet
Avenue) filed an application with the City of Richfield requesting
a rezoning of.the land at 6438 and 6444 First Avenue South from R
(residence) to C-2 (general commercial); and
WHEREAS, approval of such rezoning, in conjunction with
approval of an off-street parking permit, would permit Norwest Bank
to expand their parking capacity and relocate the bank drive-up
teller facility; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 1993, the Richfield City Council held
a public hearing to receive testimony for or against the rezoning;
and
WHEREAS, after full review and consideration, the Richfield
City Council makes the following findings of fact regarding the
rezoning:
1. The proposal would increase noise and air pollution within the
adjacent single family neighborhood.
2. The proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan in
• that it would generate high traffic volumes within the adjacent
single family neighborhood.
3. The proposal would have adverse impacts on property values with
the adjacent single family neighborhood.
4. The subject parcels have been zoned R for several years.
5. The applicant did not demonstrate that changes have occurred in
the area.
6. The applicant did not demonstrate that the R zoning of the
subject parcels was incorrect.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RICHFIELD, that Norwest Bank's application to rezone property at
6438 and 6444 First Avenue South from R (residence) to C-2 (general
commercial) be denied.
Adopted this day of , 19
ATTEST:
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
0
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
"ATTACHMENT TWO" 7-3
0
•
•
m
Q
d
0
z
J A Norwest Bank Proposal
.-t:urm° nv
6445 Nicollet Avenue
'"'M° Plan Submitted 1 / 19; 93
a {1
SECTION B
East Sixty-Fifth Street
,-.)-4
JAMES P. LARKIN
ROBERT L. HOFFMAN
JACK F. DALY
D. KENNETH LINDGREN
LD H. FRIEDELL
E. MULLIGAN
C. ERICKSON
ARD J. DRISCOLL
GENE N. FULLER
JOHN D. FULLMER
ROBERT E. BOYLE
FRANK I. HARVEY
CHARLES S. MODELL
CHRISTOPHER J. DIETZEN
JOHN R. BEATTIE
LINDA H. FISHER
THOMAS P. STOLTMAN
MICHAEL C. JACKMAN
JOHN E. DIEHL
JON S. SWIERZEWSKI
THOMAS J. FLYNN
JAMES P. QUINN
TODD I. FREEMAN
PETER K. BECK
JEROME H. KAHNKE
GERALD L. BECK
JOHN B. LUNDQUIST
DAYLE NO LAN*
THOMAS B. HUMPHREY, JR.
JOHN A. COTTER"
BEATRICE A. ROTH W EILER
PAUL B. PLUNKETT
ALAN L. KILDOW
KATHLEEN M. NEWMAN
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER
7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431-1194
TELEPHONE (612) 835-3800
FAX (612) 896-3333
MICHAEL B. LEBARON
GREGORY E. KORSTAD
GARY A. VAN CLEVE*
DANIEL L. BOWLES
TODD M. VLATKOVICH
?- TIMOTHY J. McMANUS
TIMOTHY J. KEANE
ALAN M. ANDERSON
DONNA L. ROBACK
MICHAEL W. SCHLEY
LISA A. GRAY
GARY A. RENNEKE
CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL
MICHAEL A. ROBERTSON
BRUCE J. DOUGLAS
SHANNON K. MCCAMBRIDGE
WILLIAM C. GRIFFITH, JR.
JOHN J. STEFFENHAGEN
DANIEL W. VOSS
MARK A. RURIK
JOHN R. HILL
THOMAS J. SEYMOUR
MICHAEL J. SMITH
VILIS R. INDE
DWIGHT N. HOLMBO
FREDERICK K. HAUSER III
MARY E. VOS
LARRY D. MARTIN
JANE E. BREMER
RENEE L. ToENGES
MARCY R. KREISMAN
MARIEL E. PII LO LA
OF COUNSEL
WENDELL R. ANDERSON
JOSEPH GITIS
"ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN
January 19, 1994
Mayor Martin J. Kirsch
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2598
Re: Norwest Bank
• Application for Rezoning
Dear Mayor Kirsch and Council Members:
On November 22, 1993, the City Council graciously agreed to defer
final action on Norwest Bank's rezoning request so that Norwest could:
° look at all possible alternatives to the request as proposed;
° investigate the availability and economic feasibility of
acquiring property to the north of the bank;
° review the site plan to see how it could be revised to
address neighborhood and City Council concerns; and
° hold additional meetings with immediate neighbors.
The purpose of this letter is to update the Council on these efforts
and to formally submit a revised site plan.
The process of looking for a better alternative began with the
preparation of a site plan which eliminated the need for a rezoning by
providing parking for the Bank to the north of its existing property.
The site plan prepared worked very well for the Bank and became the
Bank's preferred alternative.
a e next step was to investigate the availability of the property to
the north. Both City representatives and a third party real estate
11-6 LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
Alkyor Martin J. Kirsch
mbers of the City Council
January 19, 1994
Page 2
broker retained by this office made inquiries regarding the
availability of the property. Both were advised that the property is
not for sale because the current owner is holding it for
redevelopment. The City then investigated the potential cost of City
acquisition by eminent domain. This cost, well over half a million
dollars, is far beyond what can be supported for the proposed parking
area.
Having exhausted all possibilities for providing parking to the north
of the Bank's existing site, we turned our attention to the property
which the Bank currently owns to the east of its existing building.
Our goal was to see how the prior site plan could be revised to
address neighborhood and City Council concerns. The two major
concerns we identified were the level of commercial activity on the
properties along First Avenue and the amount of Bank traffic
travelling on neighborhood streets.
We proposed to address these issues by:
° Reversing the location of the parking area and the drive-thru
• banking facility, so that the drive-thru banking facility
would be located immediately adjacent to the Bank and
constructed entirely on land presently zoned for commercial
purposes. The properties along First Avenue would then be
used only for parking.
° Reversing the traffic flow so that traffic would enter off of
65th Street instead of exit onto it. Informal discussions
with traffic consultants convinced us that this would reduce
the amount of Bank traffic traveling through the
neighborhood.
A site plan was prepared incorporating these revisions and presented
to 15-20 neighboring residents at a meeting on January 11, 1994. The
neighbors who attended this meeting do not support any use of the
properties along First Avenue for bank-related activities. However,
they felt particularly strongly that reversing the traffic direction
would increase, rather than decrease, the amount of Bank traffic in
their neighborhood. With respect to flipping the parking and drive-
thru banking facilities, the neighbor most directly affected seemed to
feel that it would be better to have the parking lot along side their
garage than the drive-thru facility.
With this input, we had a final site plan prepared, a copy of which is
attached. This site plan keeps the traffic flow from north to south,
as it is presently. To address the issue of cars turning left on 65th
'-reet into the neighborhood, we have proposed a median on 65th Street
prevent this left turn movement. The Bank will pay for the
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. `7r
Wor Martin J. Kirsch
lWnbers of the City Council
January 19, 1994
Page 3
construction of this median, if the City Council directs that it be
installed.
The final site plan has the drive-thru facility adjacent to the Bank
on the existing commercially zoned property. The properties along
First Avenue would be used only for parking. This reduces the
activity level on those properties and also allows for a wider
landscaped buffer along First Avenue. The site plan shows the parking
area being screened from residential properties along First Avenue by
a combination of fences, berms, hedges, and trees. We have advised
the property owner immediately to the north of the proposed parking
area that we will work with them if they would like to see different
tree species or other landscaping treatment along the common property
line.
A further positive with putting parking to the east is that the Bank's
investment in this property will be substantially less than if the
drive-thru facility were located there. This means that the parking
area could be relocated to the north of the existing Bank if this
property became available to the City at some point in the future.
he property along First Avenue could then be traded for the property
the north and returned by the City to residential use.
We believe the enclosed site plan, while not a new proposal, is a
substantially improved plan from that which the Council had before it
on November 22. Putting the drive-thru facilities up against the
existing bank building will reduce the level of activity on the
property along First Avenue; and the proposed median should all but
eliminate Bank traffic in the neighborhood.
We are aware that the closest neighbors do not support the Bank's use
of its property along First Avenue for any bank-related activity.
However, the Bank is a facility which serves the entire community of
people who live, work and shop in the City of Richfield. The Bank
needs to provide additional parking to serve this larger community and
to alleviate the impact which its current facility is having on
Nicollet Avenue as customers backup onto Nicollet attempting to get
into the existing drive-thru facilities, and circle the Bank looking
for parking spaces.
On behalf of myself and Norwest Bank we would like to thank the
Council for giving us the opportunity to review and improve the
proposed site plan. We regret that we have not been able to eliminate
the need for the requested rezoning. However, we remain hopeful that
at some point in the future the Bank will be able to work with the
City to move the parking to the north.
r1
U
h -1 LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
yor Martin J. Kirsch
WInbers of the City Council
January 19, 1994
Page 4
We therefore request that the Council take final action on Norwest's
rezoning request and approve the rezoning at its January 24, 1994
meeting. We suggest that this approval be subject to the conditions
originally proposed, plus the additional condition that the Bank enter
into an agreement with the City to move the parking to the north if
that property becomes available to the City in the future.
We will be at the Council meeting on Monday to present the site plan
in greater detail and answer any questions you may have.
7Z,?L
Peter K. Beck, for
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd.
kw
Enclosure
Dennis Meek
Nancy McMahon
Dave Nelson
•
PKB:IR9s
f
I
f
EXISTV40 Do Cwm us
1 TREK
. ftsLS'rII16.
RDIIADIQ
I re GRNAtaxrAC -+ ' --reorossu DRCUXXXX
+ a TRRS ( nee
txmTvio COKNUODS I .
TRU
- j 1 Mcm,TO MATCH
rmmNo
-G GARAGE
I A• f
aurwx rr"•.. r.a.r•
0
I ;
+ ' i
1 ? i l k i\
1 NOrwest Bank
1 ?I
J f I I 1 \
?
1
L
1
~ 1
\
01300
} 04
6
1
T'
;To
+
i.
I' "K
1
-I
East Slaty-Fifth Street.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 41
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Resolution providing for the awarding of the sale of $575,000
General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A; and
resolution providing for the awarding of the sale of $2,790,000
General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B.
Background:
Upon request, Publicorp, Inc. completed a preliminary analysis of
the potential for refunding various bond issues for the City of
Richfield. The current interest climate provided an opportunity
for the City to take advantage of some savings on the debt
service of its outstanding bonds.
After completing the analysis, Publicorp identified two
outstanding bond issues which could be refunded in order to
provide projected present value debt savings of approximately
$175,000. This net savings would be after all fees and closing
costs were paid.
The two bond issues suitable for refunding are:
? General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1988.
? General Obligation Refunding Bonds of 1987.
Both of these issues are crossover refunding with call dates on
February 1, 1997. That means that the City would continue to
make the current debt service payments until sometime after
February 1, 1997. At that time, the reduced debt service
payments would come into effect. Thus, the actual savings would
not be experienced until that time.
The cost of issuance would be as follows:
Underwriter's Discount $41,875
Closing Costs $52,125
The resolution authorizing the issuance of the refunding bonds
was passed by the City Council on December 13, 1993. Upon
obtaining quotations for the refunding bonds, the City Council
could decide not to complete the refunding bond sale if the
projected savings to not meet the current projection.
Bids and relevant data will be compiled by representatives of
Publicorp, Inc. for presentation to the City Council at the
regular City Council meeting of January 24, 1994.
In order to have the most current bond quotation possible prior
to the bid award, it is customary practice to open bids the day
of the award. The bond sale opening will take place at 11 a.m.
on January 24, 1994. Sale results, plus recommendations, will be
reported at the City Council meeting of January 24, 1994.
L "--I
41 Recommended Motion:
Adopt the resolutions awarding the sale of the General Obligation
Refunding Bonds Series 1994A and 1994B.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The bond sale was authorized by the City Council on December
13, 1993.
2. The bond sale has been conducted pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes and Internal Revenue Code.
3. Refunding of the bond issues will provide a net present value
savings for the City of Richfield.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. There is no alternative recommendation if the City wishes to
approve the bond sale.
2. The City may decide to not award the sale of the refunding
bonds if the interest rate is an unfavorable one.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The City Council should act immediately to confirm the bond sale,
if it is decided favorable after the bid opening which was
conducted earlier on January 24, 1994.
Respectfully submitted,
Prosser
JDP:cak
40
JAN _ 11994
HOLMES & GRAVEN
Attorneys at Law CHARTERED /
''
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
ROBERT A. ALSOP (612) 337-9300 ROBERT C. LONG
NALD H. BATTY
O LAURA K. MOLLET
EPHEN N J. BUBUL Facsimile (612) 337-9310 BARBARA L. PORTWOOD
JOHN B. DEAN JAMES M. STROMMEN
MARY G. DOBBINS JAMES J. THOMSON, JR.
STEFANIE N. GALEY LARRY M. WERTHEIM
CORRINE A. HEINE BONNIE L. WILKINS
JAMES S. HOLMES WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL GARY P. WINTER
DAVID J. KENNEDY DAVID L. GRAVEN (1929-1991)
JOHN R. LARSON (612) 337-9212 -
WELLINGTON H. LAW OF COUNSEL
CHARLES L. LEFEVERE ROBERT C. CARLSON
JOHN M. LEFEVRE, JR. ROBERT L. DAVIDSON
ROBERT J. LINDALL January 21, 1994 T. JAY SALMEN
Mr. James Prosser
City of Richfield
6700 Portland Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55423
RE: General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A
General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B
Dear Mr. Prosser:
Enclosed please find forms of the resolutions awarding the sale of the captioned bond
financings to be considered at the City. Council meeting scheduled for Monday,
January 24. Publicorp will furnish you with the remaining information to complete
these resolutions after the proposals have been reviewed on Monday. Also enclosed
are forms of the Refunding Escrow Agreements referenced as being on file with the
City for each of these issues.
I will arrange for publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in both the Richfield
Sun and the Minneapolis StarTribune.
Please do not hesitate to call me if I can be of any further assistance to you
regarding these financings.
Sincerely,
J
Stefanie N'. Galey
SNG/bjm
Enclosures
cc (w/enc) : Mark Ruff
•
SNG64526
RC145-260
• Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on
Monday, January 24, 1994, commencing at 7:00 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the
proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City's $
• General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A.
The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been
received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal of the Bonds. The
proposals were as follows:
•
SNG64489
RC145-260
W'
After due consideration of the proposals, Member then
introduced the following written resolution and moved its adoption the reading of
which had been dispensed with by unanimous consent:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $ GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1994A;
FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS;
DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY;
PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE
ESCROWING AND INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS THEREOF;
AND PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF
BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY.
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota (City) as follows:
Section 1. Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Theproposalof (Purchaser)
to purchase $ General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds,
• Series 1994A (Bonds) of the City described in the Terms of Proposal thereof is
determined to be a reasonable offer and is accepted, the proposal being to purchase
the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for
Bonds bearing interest as follows:
Year of Interest Year of Interest
Maturity Rate Maturity Rate
1998 2004
1999 2005
2000 2006
2001 2007
2002 2008
2003
Net effective interest rate :
1.02. The sum of $ being the amount proposed by the Purchaser
in excess of $ is credited to the Escrow Account hereinafter
created, or designated to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds, as the case may be.
The City Finance Manager is directed to deposit the good faith check of the
Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith
checks of the unsuccessful proposers forthwith. The Mayor and City Manager are
directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City.
1.03. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds in the total principal
• amount of $ , originally dated February 1, 1994, in the denomination
of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing
88064489
RC145-260
l0-5
interest as above set forth, and which mature serially on February 1 in the years
and amounts as follows :
Year Amount Year Amount
1998 2004
1999 2005
2000 2006
2001 2007
2002 2008
2003
1.04. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2003 and on
any date thereafter to prepay Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 2004.
Redemption may be in whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If
redemption is in part, those Bonds remaining unpaid which have the latest maturity
date will be prepaid first. If only part of the Bonds having a common maturity date
are called for prepayment the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by
the Registrar. All payments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Section 2. Registration and Payment.
2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds shall be issued only in fully registered
form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount
thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last
interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the
Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of
authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made
available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of
authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest
payment date, in which case such Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue.
The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year,
commencing August 1, 1994, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of
business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not
such day is a business day.
2.03. Registration. The City will appoint, and shall maintain, a bond
registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (Registrar). The
effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with
respect thereto are as follows :
(a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate
trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for' the
registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and
exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly
endorsed by the . registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written
instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed
by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the
i registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in
the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds
SN064489
RC145-260
of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, 'as requested by the
transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of
any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest
payment date and until such interest payment date.
(c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the
registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one
or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as
requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange
will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as
directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented
to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond
until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate
instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer
is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in
good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat
the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the
absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the
purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and
• interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a
registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to
satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or
sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For a transfer or exchange of Bonds,
the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to
reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge
required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes
mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond
of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution
for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in
substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the
reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith;
and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the
Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen
or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar
of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount
satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the
Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar
will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be
given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has
already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it
• is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment.
SN064489
RC145-260
• (i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for
redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given
by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail
(postage prepaid) not more than 60 and not less than 30 days prior to the date
fixed for redemption to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at
the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar. Failure
to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect
therein, will not affect the validity of any proceeding for the redemption of
Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the
specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on
deposit with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints
Minnesota, as the initial
Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver,
on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation
of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or
trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation is
authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and
customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves
the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days'.notice and upon the appointment of
a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all
cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the
bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest
due date, without further order of this Council, the Finance Manager must transmit
to the Registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then
due.
2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared
under the direction of the Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the
signatures of the Mayor and the Manager, provided that all signatures may be
printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer
whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be
such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile will
nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had
remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not
be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under
this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been
duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the
Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by
the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond
is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this
Resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated,
the Manager shall deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase
price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the
Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price.
2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed
definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form
set forth in Section 3 with such changes as may be necessary to reflect nlore than one
maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive
Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled.
SN064489
RC145-260
l0 "?
• Section 3. Form of Bond .
3.01. The Bonds will be printed in substantially the following form:
[Face of the Bond)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF RICHFIELD
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 1994A
Date of
Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP
February 1, 1994
No.
The City of Richfield, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal
corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (City), acknowledges itself to be
indebted and for value received. promises to pay to
n
U
or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date
specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate
specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing
August 1, 1994, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of
business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately
preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender
hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of
America by check or draft by , Minnesota,
as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its
designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and
full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the
full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby
irrevocably pledged.
The City may elect on February 1, 2003, and on any date thereafter, to prepay
Bonds of this issue maturing on or after February 1, 2004. Redemption may be in
whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If redemption is in part, those
Bonds remaining unpaid which have the latest maturity date will be prepaid first.
-If only part of the Bonds having a common maturity date are called for prepayment
the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the Registrar. All
prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds which this Bond forms a
• part as "qualified tax exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265 (b) (3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) relating to disallowance
SWG64489
RC145-260
(?_9
of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed
by the Code for the calendar year of issue.
Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and
such provisions for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth in
this place.
This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any
security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication
hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its
authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the
facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be
dated as of the date set forth below.
Dated :
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(Facsimile) (Facsimile)
City Manager Mayor
•
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned
within.
By
Authorized Representative
[Reverse of the Bond]
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $
all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date,
redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted
by the City Council on January 24, 1994 (the Resolution), for the purpose of
providing money to refund in advance of maturity and on the Redemption Date, as
defined in the Resolution, a portion of certain general obligation bonds of the City,
pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of.-the State of
Minnesota, and the City's home rule charter, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections
475.67, Subdivision 13 and Chapter 429. The interest hereon is payable until the
• Redemption Date, out of the Escrow Account and Debt Service Account in the City's
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A Debt Service Fund and after the Redemption Date
SN064489
RC145-260
(0,- 0
• from special assessments against property specially benefitted by local improvements
as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights
and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably
pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy
ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency
in special assessments pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to
rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds
in denominations of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities.
As provided in the.Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth
therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office
of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's
attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written
instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the
registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange
for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the
City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or
registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the
same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee
or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or
exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name
this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue
or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither
the City not the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
• IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all
acts, conditions and things required-by the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota and the City's home rule charter to be done, to exist, to happen and to be
performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid
and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been
done,. do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that
the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any
constitutional, statutory or charter limitation of indebtedness.
(Form of certificate to be printed on the reverse side of each Bond, following
a full copy of the legal opinion.)
I certify that the above is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion
rendered by bond counsel on the issue of Bonds of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for
the Bonds.
(Facsimile Signature)
City Manager
•
SNO64489
RC145-260
v
• The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to
applicable laws or regulations :
TEN COM -- as tenants UNIF GIFT MIN ACT Custodian
in common (Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants under Uniform Gifts or
by entireties Transfers to Minors
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with
right of survivorship and Act . . .
not as tenants in common (State*)
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and all rights
thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within
Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated :
Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond
with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in
every particular, without alteration or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed:
Signature (s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a
brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges .
The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information
concerning the assignee requested below is provided.
Name and Address :
0
(Include information for all joint owners if
this Bond is held by joint account.)
BY064489
RC165-260
. Please insert social security or other
identifying number of assignee
3.02. The City Manager is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the
proposed approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, which is to be complete except as to dating thereof and cause the opinion
to be printed on each Bond, together with a certificate to be signed by the facsimile
signature of the Manager in substantially the form set forth in the form of Bond.
The Manager is authorized and directed to execute the certificate in the name of the
City upon receipt of the opinion and to file the opinion in the City offices.
Section 4. Bonds; Security; Escrow.
4.01. • Funds and Accounts. For the convenience and proper administration
of the moneys to be borrowed and repaid on the Bonds and the Refunded Bonds (as
defined in the resolution providing for the issuance and sale of the Bonds), and to
provide adequate and specific security for the Purchaser and holders from time to
time of the Bonds and Refunded Bonds, there is hereby created a special fund to be
designated the Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A Debt Service Fund (the Fund) to be
administered and maintained by the Finance Manager as a bookkeeping account
separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records
of the City. The Fund shall be maintained in the manner herein specified until all
• of the Refunded Bonds have been paid and until all of the Bonds and the interest
thereon shall have been fully paid. There shall be maintained in the Fund two
separate accounts, to be designated the Escrow Account and Debt Service Account.
(a) Escrow Account. The Escrow Account shall be maintained as an
Escrow Account (Escrow Account) with
in , Minnesota, which is a suitable financial institution within
the State, whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, whose combined capital and surplus is not less than $500, 000 and
said financial institution is hereby designated escrow agent (Escrow Agent)
for the Escrow Account. All proceeds of the sale of the Bonds shall be
received by the Escrow Agent and applied to fund the Escrow Account or to
pay costs of issuing the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds not used to pay costs
of issuance are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the Escrow
Account, together with all investment earnings thereon. The Escrow Account
shall be invested in securities maturing or callable at the option of the holder
on such dates and bearing interest at such rates as shall be required to
provide sufficient funds, together with any cash or other funds retained in
the Escrow Account, to pay when due the interest to accrue on each Bond to
and including February 1, 1997 (Redemption Date), and to pay when due on
the Redemption Date the principal amount of each of the Refunded Bonds then
outstanding. From the Escrow Account there shall be paid (i) all interest paid
on, or to be paid on, or to accrue on, the Bonds to and including the
Redemption Date, and (ii) the principal of the Refunded Bonds due by reason
of redemption on the Redemption Date. The Escrow -Account shall be
irrevocably appropriated to the payment of the principal of and interest on the
• Bonds until the proceeds of the Bonds therein are applied to prepayment of
the Refunded Bonds. The moneys in the Escrow Account shall be used solely
SNG64489
RC145-260
for the purposes herein set forth and for no other purpose, except that any
• surplus in the Escrow Account may be remitted to the City, all in accordance
with the Escrow Agreement (hereafter defined) by and between the. City and
the, Escrow Agent. Any moneys remitted to the City upon termination of the
Escrow Agreement shall be deposited in the Debt Service Account.
(b) Debt Service Account. To the Debt Service Account there is
hereby pledged and irrevocably appropriated and there shall be credited: (i)
any balance remitted to the City upon the termination of the Escrow
Agreement; (ii) any balance remaining on February 2, 1997, in the Debt
Service Fund created by the City Council resolution authorizing the issuance
and sale of the Refunded Bonds (Prior Resolution) ; (iii) any collections of all
taxes hereafter levied for the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon; (iv)
all investment earnings on funds in the Debt Service Account; (v) collection
after the Redemption Date of special assessments pledged to repayment of the
Refunded Bonds in the Prior Resolution; (vi) accrued interest (if any)
received upon delivery of the Bonds to the extent not required to fund the
Escrow Account; and (vii) any and all other moneys which are properly
available and are appropriated by the City Council to the Debt Service
Account. The amount of any surplus remaining in the Debt Service Account
when the Bonds and interest thereon are paid shall be used as provided in
Section 475.61, Subdivision 4 of the Act.
4.02. The moneys in the Debt Service Account shall be used solely to pay the
principal of and interest on the Bonds or any other bonds hereafter issued and made
payable from the Fund. No portion of the proceeds of the Bonds shall be used
• directly or indirectly to acquire higher yielding investments or to replace funds
which were used directly or indirectly to acquire higher yielding investments,
except (i) for a reasonable temporary period until such proceeds are needed for the
purpose for which the Bonds were issued, and (ii) in addition to the above, in an
amount not greater than the lesser of five percent of the proceeds of the Bonds or
$100,000. To this effect, any proceeds of the Bonds any sums from time to time held
in the Fund (or any other City account which will be used to pay principal and
interest to become due on the Bonds) in excess of amounts which under the
applicable federal arbitrage regulations may be invested without regard as to yield
shall not be invested at a yield in excess of the applicable yield restrictions imposed
by the arbitrage regulations on such investments after taking into account any
applicable temporary periods or minor portion made available under the federal
arbitrage regulations. In addition, the proceeds of the Bonds and money in the
Fund shall not be invested in obligations or deposits issued by, guaranteed by or
insured by the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof if and to the
extent that such investment would cause the Bonds to be federally guaranteed within
the meaning of Section 149(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
Code).
4.03. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the
principal and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full
faith, credit and taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby irrevocably
pledged. If the balance in the Escrow Account or Debt Service Account is ever
insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other
bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of monies in the
general fund of the City which are available for such purpose, and such general
fund may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Escrow Account or Debt
Service Account when a sufficient balance is available therein.
SNG64499
RC145-260
(0.ly
4.04. It is determined that estimated collection of Assessments and interest
thereon for the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds after the Redemption
Date will produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to meet when
due, the principal and interest payments on the Bonds and that no tax levy is
needed at this time.
4.05.. Filin . The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy
of this resolution with the Director of Property Taxation of Hennepin County and to
obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act.
4.06. Prior Resolution Pledges. The pledges and covenants of the City made
by the Prior Resolution relating to the levy and collection of Special Assessments
against property specially benefitted by improvements financed by the Bonds and
the Refunded Bonds are restated and confirmed in all respects. The provisions of
the Prior Resolution are hereby supplemented to the extent necessary to give full
effect to the provisions of this resolution.
Section 5. Refunding; Findings; Redemption of Refunded Bonds.
5.01. As of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds the proceeds
of the Bonds, in the amount of $ plus accrued interest on the Bonds less
necessary expenses of the issuance of the Bonds (Proceeds), together with other
funds (Funds) in the amount of $ are hereby -pledged and
appropriated and shall be deposited in the Escrow Account.
5.02. It is hereby found and determined that the Proceeds and Funds available
and appropriated to the Escrow Account will be sufficient, together with the
permitted earnings on the investment of the Escrow Account, to pay at maturity or
redemption all of the principal of and redemption premium (if any) on the Refunded
Bonds and interest on the Bonds through the Redemption Date.
5.03. Securities purchased from the monies in the Escrow Account shall be
limited to securities specified in Section 475..67, Subdivision 8 of the Act.
Springsted Incorporated, as agent for the City is hereby authorized. and directed
to purchase for and on behalf of the City and in its name, appropriate securities to
fund the Escrow Account. Upon the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the
securities so purchased shall be deposited with the Escrow Agent and held pursuant
to the terms of the Escrow Agreement and the Resolution.
5.04. The Refunded Bonds maturing on February 1, 1998 and thereafter shall
be redeemed and prepaid on the Redemption Date. The Refunded Bonds shall be
redeemed and prepaid in accordance with their terms and in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in the form of Notice of Call for Redemption attached
hereto as Attachment A which terms and conditions are hereby approved and
incorporated herein by reference.
5.05. Escrow Agreement. On or prior to the delivery of the Refunding Bonds,
the Mayor and the Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf
of the City an escrow agreement (Escrow Agreement) with the Escrow Agent in
substantially the form now on file with -the Manager. All essential terms and
conditions of the Escrow Agreement including payment by the City of reasonable
charges for the services of the Escrow Agent, are hereby approved and adopted and
made a part of this resolution, and the City covenants that it will promptly enforce
all provisions thereof in the event of default thereunder by the Escrow Agent.
BN064489
RC145-260
5.06. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon, have been
discharged as provided in this paragraph, all pledges, covenants and other rights
granted by this. resolution to the holders of the Bonds shall cease, except that the
pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds shall remain in full force and effect. The City
may discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with-the Registrar
on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; if any Bond
should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with
the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment the in full with interest accrued
to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge and defease the
Bonds in their entirety by complying with the provisions of Section 475.67 of
Minnesota Statutes, except that the funds deposited in escrow in accordance with
said provisions may (to the extent permitted by law) but need not be, in whole or in
part, proceeds of bonds as therein provided without the consent of any
Bondholders.
Section 6. Authentication of Transcript.
6.01. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and
furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies
of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial
condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and
transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown
by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the
validity and marketability of the Bonds and such instruments, including any
heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts
stated therein.
6.02. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in
connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their
knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation
of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement.
Section 7 . Tax Matters.
7.01. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the
Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to
taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the
Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions,
and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative
action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not
become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as
presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds.
7.02. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to
establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds
under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to
temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater
than the yield on the Bonds, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the
United States.
SNG64489
RC145-260
V
7.03. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations"
within the meaning of Section 265 (b) (3) of the Code, the City makes the following
factual statements and representations :
(a) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" (treating qualified
501(c) (3) bonds as not being private activity bonds) as defined in Section 141
of the Code;
(b) the City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt
obligations" for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code;
(c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations
(other than private activity bonds., treating qualified 501(c) (3) bonds as not
being private activity bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all
subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 1994 will not exceed
$10,000,000; and
(d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City
during calendar year 1994 have been designated for purposes of Section
265(b)(3) of the Code.
7.04. The City shall use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural
requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this
section.
7.05: Pursuant to the requirements of Section 147(f) of the Code, the City
• shall hold a public hearing on February 14, 1994. The City Clerk is authorized to
publish a notice of public hearing substantially in the form attached as Attachment
B hereto in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than fourteen (14)
days prior to the date fixed for the hearing and in the official newspaper of the City.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution.was duly seconded by
Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof :
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
0
8NO6`489
RC165-260
?,'-O
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS.
CITY OF RICHFIELD )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully
compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City held on January 24, 1994 with the original minutes on file in
my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as
they relate to the issuance and sale of $ General Obligation
h
Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A of the City.
WITNESS My hand officially as such Clerk and the corporate seal of the City
this day of , 19_
0
City Clerk
Richfield, Minnesota
(SEAL)
SNG64489
RC145-260
ATTACHMENT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$1,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1987
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, there have been called for redemption and
prepayment on
February 1, 1997
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of 1987, dated September 1, 1987, having stated maturity dates of February 1
in the year's 1998 through 2008, both inclusive, totalling $550,000 in principal
amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity CUSIP
1998 763325 VS3
1999 763325 VT1
2000 763325 VU8
2001 763325 VV6
2002 763325 VW4
2003 763325 VX2
2004 763325 VYO
2005 763325 VZ7
2006 763325 WA1
2007 763325 WB9
2008 763325 WC7
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1,
1997, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the
bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment
at the main office of National City Bank of Minneapolis, in the City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota, on or before February 1, 1997.
The Trustee shall not be responsible for the selection or use of the CUSIP
number, nor is any representation made as to the correctness indicated in the
Redemption Notice or on any Bond. It is included solely for convenience of the
Holders.
Dated: January 24, 1994.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
By /s/ James Prosser
City Manager -
City of Richfield, Minnesota
Further Information:
8NG64489
RC145-260
?,J-q
ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota (the "City") will meet in the Council chambers in the City Hall in the City
of Richfield at 7:00 P.M. on Monday, February 14, 1994, to conduct a public hearing
on a proposal that the City undertake to issue refunding bonds (the "Bonds") to
refund bonds previously issued to finance a project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 429. The project consisted of the purchase and installation of a fire
suppression system in The Academy of Holy Angels School located at 6600 Nicollet
Avenue in the City and owned by The Academy of Holy Angels, a Minnesota nonprofit
corporation. The total principal amount of the proposed Bonds will be approximately
$575,000. The Bonds shall be general obligations of the City and shall be payable
primarily from special assessments pledged to the payment thereof. The full faith
and credit of the City has been irrevocably pledged for payment of the Bonds, and
the City Council has obligated itself to levy taxes on all of the taxable property in
the City in the event of any deficiency in special assessments pledged, which taxes
may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount.
All persons interested may appear and be heard at the time and place set forth
above, or may file written comments with the City Clerk prior to the date of the
• hearing set forth above.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
•
/s/ Thomas P. Ferber
City Clerk
SN064489
RC145-260
?-020
• Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council -
of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on
Monday, January 24, 1994, commencing at 7: 00 P.M.
The following members were present:
and the following were absent:
The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the
proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City's $
General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B .
The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been
received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal of the Bonds. The
proposals were as follows :
•
SNG64519
RC145-260
?'- L?-j
After due consideration of the proposals, Member then
introduced the following written resolution and moved its adoption the reading of
which had been dispensed with by unanimous consent:
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF $ GENERAL
OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 1994B;
FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS;
DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY;
PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT; PROVIDING FOR THE
ESCROWING AND INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS THEREOF;
AND PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF
BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY.
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota (City) as follows :
Section 1. Sale of Bonds.
1.01. Theproposalof (Purchaser)
to purchase $ General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds,
Series 1994B (Bonds) of the City described in the Terms of Proposal thereof is
determined to be a reasonable offer and is accepted, the proposal being to purchase
the Bonds at a price of $ plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for
Bonds bearing interest as follows:
Year of Interest Year of Interest
Maturity Rate 'Maturity Rate
1998 2002
1999 2003
2000 2004
2001
Net effective interest rate :
1.02. The sum of $ being the amount proposed by the Purchaser
in excess of $ is credited to the Escrow Account hereinafter
created, or designated to pay costs of issuance of the Bonds, as the case may be.
The City Finance Manager is directed to deposit the good faith check of the
Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith
checks of the unsuccessful proposers forthwith. The Mayor and City Manager are
directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City.
1.03. The City will forthwith issue' and sell the Bonds in the total principal
amount of $ , originally dated February 1, 1994, in the denomination
of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing
io interest as above set forth, and which mature serially on February 1 in the years
and amounts as follows :
SNG64519
RC145-260
6 ? a-
•
Year Amount
Year Amount
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
1.04. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2003 and on
any date thereafter to prepay Bonds maturing on February 1, 2004. Redemption may
be in whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If redemption is in part,
the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the Registrar. All
payments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
Section 2. Registration and Payment.
•
2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds shall be issued only in fully registered
form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount
thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last
interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the
Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of
authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made
available for payment, in which case such Bond shall be dated as of the date of
authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest
payment date, in which case such Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue.
The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year,
commencing August 1, 1994, to the owner of record thereof as of the close of
business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not
such day is a business day.
2.03. Registration. The City will appoint, and shall maintain, a bond
registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (Registrar). The
effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with
respect thereto are as follows :
(a) Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate
trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the
registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers -and
exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged.
(b) Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly
endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written
instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed
by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the
registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in
the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds
of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the
transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of
any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest
payment date and until such interest payment date.
(c) Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the
registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one
SNG64519
RC145-260
?-d3
or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as
requested by the registered owner or the owner's attorney in writing.
(d) Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon any transfer or exchange
will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as
directed by the City.
(e) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented
to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond
until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate
instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer
is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in
good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(f) Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat
the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the
absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the
purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and
interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a
registered owner or upon the owner's order will be valid and effectual to
satisfy and discharge the liability upon such Bond to the extent of the sum or
sums so paid.
(g) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For a transfer or exchange of Bonds,
the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to
• reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge
required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange.
(h) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes
mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond
of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution
for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in
substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the
reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith;
and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the
Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen
or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar
of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount
satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the
Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar
will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be
given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has
already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it
is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment.
(i) Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for
redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given
by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail
(postage prepaid) not more than 60 and not less than 30 days prior to the date
fixed for redemption to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at
the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by
publishing the notice in the manner required by law. Failure to give notice
-by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will
SNG64519
RC145-260
?,C) ?
S not affect the validity of any proceeding for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds
so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified
redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit
with the place of payment at that time.
2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints
Minnesota, as the initial
Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver,
on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation
of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or
trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, such corporation is
authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and
customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves
the right to remove the Registrar upon 30 days' notice and upon the appointment of
a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all
cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the
bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest
due date, without further order of this Council, the Manager must transmit to the
Registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due.
2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared
under the direction of the Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the
signatures of the Mayor and the Manager, provided that all signatures may be
printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. In case any officer
whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be
such officer before the delivery of any Bond, such signature or facsimile will
• nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same-as if the officer had
remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not
be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under
this Resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been
duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the
Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by
the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on each Bond
is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this
Resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated,
the Manager shall deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase
price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the
Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price.
2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed
definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form
set forth in Section 3 with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one
maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive
Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled.
Section 3. Form of Bond.
3.01. The Bonds will be printed in substantially the following form:
91
SNG64519
RC145-260
r?5
S [Face of the Bond]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
CITY OF RICHFIELD
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BOND, SERIES 1994B
Date of
Rate Maturity Original Issue CUSIP
February 1, 1994
No.
The City of Richfield, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal
corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (City), acknowledges itself to be
indebted and for value received promises to pay to
or registered assigns, the principal sum of $ on the maturity date
• specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate
specified above, payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing
August 1, 1994, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of
business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately
preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender
hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of
America by check or draft by , Minnesota,
as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its
designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and
full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the
full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby
irrevocably pledged.
The City may elect on February 1, 2003, and on any interest payment date
thereafter, to prepay Bonds of this issue maturing on February 1, 2004. Redemption
may be in whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If redemption is in
part, the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the Registrar: All
prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest.
The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds which this Bond forms a
part as "qualified tax exempt obligations" within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code) relating to disallowance
of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed
by the Code for the calendar year of issue.
Additional provisions of this Bond are contained on the reverse hereof and
such provisions for all purposes have the same effect as though fully set forth in
this place.
SNG64519
RC145-260
(?q -c') b
This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any
security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication
hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its
authorized representatives.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the
facsimile signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be
dated as of the date set forth below.
Dated:
(Facsimile)
City Manager
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(Facsimile)
Mayor
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned
within.
By
Authorized Representative
[Reverse of the Bond]
This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $
all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date,
redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted
by the City Council on January 24, 1994 (the Resolution), for the purpose of
providing money to refund in advance of maturity and on the Redemption Date, as
defined in the Resolution, a portion of certain general obligation bonds of the City,
pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota, and the City's home rule charter, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections
475.67, Subdivision 13 and Chapter 429. The interest hereon is payable until the
Redemption Date, out of the Escrow Account and Debt Service Account in the City's
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B Debt Service Fund and after the Redemption Date
from special assessments against property specially benefitted by local improvements
and ad valorem taxes, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for
a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit
of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council
has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the
City in the event of any deficiency in special assessments and taxes pledged, which
taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series
SNG64519
RC145-260
are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral
multiple thereof of single maturities.
As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth
therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office
of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner's
attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written
instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the
registered owner or the owner's attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange
for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the
City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or
registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the
same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee
or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or
exchange.
The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name
this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue
or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither
the City nor the Bond Registrar shall be affected by any notice to the contrary.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all
acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota and the City's home rule charter to be done, to exist, to happen and to be
performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid
and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been
• done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that
the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any
constitutional, statutory or charter limitation of indebtedness.
(Form of certificate to be printed on the reverse side of each Bond, following
a full copy of the legal opinion.)
I certify that the above is a full, true and correct copy of the legal opinion
rendered by bond counsel on the issue of Bonds of the City of Richfield, Minnesota,
which includes the within Bond, dated as of the date of delivery of and payment for
the Bonds.
(Facsimile signature)
City Manager
SNG64519
RC145-260
The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this
Bond, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to
applicable laws. or regulations :
TEN COM -- as tenants UNIF GIFT MIN ACT Custodian
in common (Cust) (Minor)
TEN ENT -- as tenants under Uniform Gifts or
by entireties Transfers to Minors
JT TEN -- as joint tenants with
right of survivorship and Act . . . . . . . . . . . .
not as tenants in common (State)
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list.
ASSIGNMENT
For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto
the within Bond and all rights
thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within
Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Dated:
Notice: The assignor's signature to this assignment must correspond
with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in
every particular, without alteration or any change whatever.
Signature Guaranteed :
Signature (s) must be guaranteed by a national bank or trust company or by a
brokerage firm having a membership in one of the major stock exchanges.
The Bond Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information
concerning the assignee requested below is provided.
Name and Address:
(Include information for all joint owners if
this Bond is held by joint account.)
SN064519
RC145-260
1?-a9
Please insert social security or other
identifying number of assignee
3.02. The City Manager is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the
proposed approving legal opinion of Holmes & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, which is to be complete except as to dating thereof and cause the opinion
to be printed on each Bond, together with a certificate to be signed by the facsimile
signature of the Manager in substantially the form set forth in the form of Bond.
The Manager is authorized and directed to execute the certificate in the name of the
City upon receipt of the opinion and to file the opinion in the City offices.
Section 4. Bonds; Security; Escrow.
4.01. Funds and Accounts. For the convenience and proper administration
of the moneys to be borrowed and repaid on the Bonds and the Refunded Bonds (as
defined in the resolution providing for the issuance and sale of the Bonds), and to
provide adequate and specific security for the Purchaser and holders from time to
time of the Bonds and Refunded Bonds, there is hereby created a special fund to be
designated the Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B Debt Service Fund (the Fund) to be
administered and maintained by the Finance Manager as a bookkeeping account
separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records
of the City. - The Fund shall be maintained in the manner herein specified until all
of the Refunded Bonds have been paid and until all of the Bonds and the interest
thereon shall have been fully paid. There shall be maintained in the Fund two
separate accounts, to be designated the Escrow Account and Debt Service Account.
(a) Escrow Account. The Escrow Account shall be maintained as an
Escrow Account (Escrow Account) with
in , Minnesota, which is a suitable financial institution within
the State, whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, whose combined capital and surplus is not less than $500, 000 and
said financial institution is hereby designated escrow agent (Escrow Agent)
for the Escrow Account. All proceeds of the sale of the Bonds shall be
received by the Escrow Agent and applied to fund the Escrow Account or to
pay costs of issuing the Bonds. Proceeds of the Bonds not used to pay costs
of issuance are hereby irrevocably pledged and appropriated to the Escrow
Account, together with all investment earnings thereon. The Escrow Account
shall be invested in securities maturing or callable at the option of the holder
on such dates and bearing interest at such rates as shall be required to
provide sufficient funds, together with any cash or other funds retained in
the Escrow Account, to pay when due the interest to accrue on each Bond to
and including February 1, 1997 (Redemption Date), and to pay when due on
the Redemption Date the principal amount of each of the Refunded Bonds then
outstanding. From the Escrow Account there shall be paid (i) all interest paid
on, or to be paid on, or to accrue on, the Bonds to and including the
Redemption Date, and (ii) the principal of the Refunded Bonds due by reason
of redemption on the Redemption Date. The Escrow Account shall be
irrevocably appropriated to the payment of the principal of and interest on the
Bonds until the proceeds of the Bonds therein are applied to prepayment of
the Refunded Bonds. The moneys in the Escrow Account shall be used solely
ON064519
RC145-260
?-3D
for the purposes herein set forth and for no other purpose, except that any
surplus in the Escrow Account may be remitted to the City, all in accordance
with the Escrow Agreement (hereafter defined) by and between the City and
the Escrow Agent. Any moneys remitted to the City upon termination of the
Escrow Agreement shall be deposited in the Debt Service Account.
(b) Debt Service Account. To the Debt Service Account there is
hereby pledged and irrevocably appropriated and there shall be credited: (i)
any balance remitted to the City upon the termination of the Escrow
Agreement; (ii) any balance remaining on February 2, 1997, in the Debt
Service Fund created by the City Council resolution authorizing the issuance
and sale of the Refunded Bonds (Prior Resolution) ; (iii) any collections of all
taxes hereafter levied for the payment of the Bonds and interest thereon; (iv)
all investment earnings on funds in the Debt Service Account; (v) collections
after the Redemption Date of all taxes levied in the Prior Resolution which
levies shall not be cancelled except as permitted by Section 475.61,
Subdivision 3 of the Act; and special assessments pledged to repayment of the
Refunded Bonds in the Prior Resolution; (vi) accrued interest (if any)
received upon delivery of the Bonds to the extent not required to fund the
Escrow Account; and (vii) any and all other moneys which are properly
available and are appropriated by the City Council to the Debt Service
Account. The amount of any surplus remaining in the Debt Service Account
when the Bonds and interest thereon are paid shall be used as provided in
Section 475.61, Subdivision 4 of the Act.
4.02. The moneys in the Debt Service Account shall be used solely to pay the
. principal of and interest on the Bonds or any other bonds hereafter issued and made
payable from the Fund. No portion of the proceeds of the Bonds shall be used
directly or indirectly to acquire higher yielding investments or to replace funds
which were used directly or indirectly to acquire higher yielding investments,
except (i) for a reasonable temporary period until such proceeds are needed for the
purpose for which the Bonds were issued, and (ii) in addition to the above, in an
amount not greater than the lesser of five percent of the proceeds of the Bonds or
$100,000. To this effect, any proceeds of the Bonds any sums from time to time held
in the Fund (or any other City account which will be used to pay principal and
interest to become due on the Bonds) in excess of amounts which under the
applicable federal arbitrage regulations may be invested without regard as to yield
shall not be invested at a yield in excess of the applicable yield restrictions imposed
by the arbitrage regulations on such investments after taking into account any
applicable temporary periods or minor portion made available under the federal
arbitrage regulations. In addition, the proceeds of the Bonds and money in the
Fund shall.not be invested in obligations or deposits issued by, guaranteed by or
insured by the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof if and to the
extent that such investment would cause the Bonds to be federally guaranteed within
the meaning of Section 149(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
Code).
4.03. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the
principal and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full
faith, credit and taxing powers of the City shall be and are hereby: irrevocably
pledged. 'If the balance in the Escrow Account or Debt Service Account is ever
insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other
bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency shall be promptly paid out of monies in the
general fund of the City which are available for such purpose, and such general
SN064519
RC145-260
(0-3
fund may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Escrow Account or Debt
Service Account when a sufficient balance is available therein.
4.04. Pledge of Existing Tax Levies.
(a) To provide moneys for payment of the principal and interest on
the Bonds, there is hereby pledged to the payment of the Bonds all those
taxes collected after the Redemption Date, which were levied in the Prior
Resolution upon all of the taxable property in the City as direct annual ad
valorem taxes to be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part
of other general property taxes in the City. Said levies were for the years
and in the amounts as follows :
Year Levy
1996 $513,030
1997 500,748
1998 496,612
1999 467,900
2000 449,800
(b) The tax levies are such that if collected in full they, together
with estimated collections of investment earnings (and until the Redemption
Date, all amounts in the Escrow Account) and other revenues herein pledged
for the payment of the Bonds, will produce at least five percent in excess of
the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on
• the Bonds. The tax levies shall be irrepealable so long as any of the
Refunded Bonds and the Bonds are outstanding and unpaid, provided that the
City reserves the right to reduce the levies in the manner and to the extent
permitted by Section 475.61, Subdivision 3 of Minnesota Statutes, as amended.
4.05.. Filin . The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy
of this resolution with the Director of Property Taxation of Hennepin County and to
obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act.
. 4.06. Prior Resolution Pledges. The pledges and covenants of the City made
by the Prior Resolution relating to the levy and collection of Special Assessments
against property specially benefitted by improvements financed by the Bonds and
the Refunded Bonds are restated and confirmed in all respects. The provisions of
the Prior Resolution are hereby supplemented to the extent necessary to give full
effect to the provisions of this resolution.
Section 5. Refunding; Findings; Redemption of Refunded Bonds.
5.01. As of the date of delivery of and payment for the Bonds the proceeds
of the Bonds, in the amount of $ plus accrued interest on the Bonds less
necessary expenses of the issuance of the Bonds (Proceeds), together with other
funds (Funds) in the amount of $ are hereby pledged and
appropriated and shall be deposited in the Escrow Account.
5.02. It is hereby found and determined that the Proceeds and Funds available
and appropriated to the Escrow Account will be sufficient, together with the
permitted earnings on the investment of the Escrow Account, to pay at maturity or
SNG64519
RC145-260
(o-3a
redemption all of the principal of and redemption premium (if any) on the Refunded
Bonds and to pay interest on the Bonds through the Redemption Date.
5.03. Securities purchased from the monies in the Escrow Account shall be
limited to securities specified in Section 475.67, Subdivision 8 of the Act.
Springsted Incorporated, as agent for the City is hereby authorized and directed
to purchase for and on behalf of the City and in its name, appropriate securities to
fund the.Escrow Account. Upon the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, the
securities so purchased shall be deposited with the Escrow Agent and held pursuant
to the terms of the Escrow Agreement and the Resolution.
5.04. The Refunded Bonds maturing on February 1, 1998 and thereafter shall
be redeemed and prepaid on the Redemption Date. The Refunded Bonds shall be
redeemed and prepaid in accordance with their terms and in accordance with the
terms and conditions set forth in the form of Notice of Call for Redemption attached
hereto as Attachment A which terms and conditions are hereby approved and
incorporated herein by reference.
5.05. Escrow Agreement. On or prior to the delivery of the Refunding Bonds,
the Mayor and the Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf
of the City an escrow agreement (Escrow Agreement) with the Escrow Agent in
substantially the form now on file with the Manager. All essential terms and
conditions of the Escrow Agreement including payment by the City of reasonable
charges for the services of the Escrow Agent, are hereby approved and adopted and
made a part of this resolution, and the City covenants that it will promptly enforce
all provisions thereof in the event of default thereunder by the Escrow Agent.
• 5.06. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon, have been
discharged as provided in this paragraph, all pledges, covenants and other rights
granted by this resolution to the holders of the Bonds shall cease, except that the
pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds shall remain in full force and effect. The City
may discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar
on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full; if any Bond
should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with
the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued
to the date of such deposit. The City may also at any time discharge and defease the
Bonds in their entirety by complying with the provisions of Section 475.67 of
Minnesota Statutes, except that the funds deposited in escrow in accordance with
said provisions may (to the extent permitted by law) but need not be, in whole or in
part, proceeds of bonds as therein provided without the consent of any
Bondholders.
Section 6. Authentication of Transcript.
6.01. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and
furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds, certified copies
of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial
condition and affairs of the City, and, such other certificates, affidavits and
transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown
by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the
validity and marketability of the Bonds and such instruments, including any
heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the City as to the facts
stated therein.
ONG64519
RC145-260
6-33
6.02. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in
connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their
knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation
of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement.
Section 7. Tax Covenant.
7.01. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the
Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or
agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to
taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), and the
Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions,
and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative
action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not
become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as
presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds.
7.02. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to
establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds
under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to
temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater
than the yield on the Bonds, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the
United States.
7.03. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to
40 cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the
Bonds to be "private activity bonds" within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141
through 150 of the Code.
7.04. In order to qualify the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations"
within the meaning of Section 265 (b) (3) of the Code, the City makes the following
factual statements and representations :
(a) the Bonds are not "private activity bonds" as defined in Section
141 of the Code;
(b) the City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt
obligations" for purposes. of Section 265(b) (3) of the Code;
(c) the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations
(other than private activity bonds, treating qualified 501(c)(3) bonds as not
being private activity bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all
subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 1994 will not exceed
$10,000,000; and
(d) not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City
during calendar year 1994 have been designated for purposes of Section
265(b)(3) of the Code.
7.05. The City shall use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural
requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this
section.
ON064519
RC145-260
0
•
•
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
Member
voted in favor thereof:
, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
SNG64519
RC145-260
• STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS.
CITY OF RICHFIELD
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the 'City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully
compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City held on January 24, 1994 with the original minutes on file in
my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as
they relate to the issuance and sale of $ General Obligation
Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B of the City.
WITNESS My hand officially as such Clerk and the corporate seal of the City
this day of , 19_
(SEAL)
•
City Clerk
Richfield, Minnesota
SN064519
RC145-260
63b
•
ATTACHMENT A
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$4,555,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF-1988
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, there have been called for redemption and
prepayment on
February 1, 1997
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Refunding
Improvement Bonds of 1988, dated October 1, 1988, having stated maturity dates of
February 1 in the years 1998 through 2004, both inclusive, totalling $2,720,000 in
principal amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity CUSIP
•
1998 763325 XH5
1999 763325 XK8
2000 763325 XM4
2001 763325 XN2
2002 763325 XP7
2003 763325 XQ5
2004 763325 XR3
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1,
1997, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the
bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment
at the main office of National City Bank of Minneapolis, in the City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota, on or before February 1, 1997.
The Registrar shall not be responsible for the selection or use of the CUSIP
number, nor is any representation made as to the correctness indicated in the
Redemption Notice or on any Bond. It is included solely for convenience of the
Holders.
Dated: January 24, 1994.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
By /s/ James Prosser
City Manager
City of Richfield, Minnesota
is Further Information:
SN064519
RC145-260
& -37
REFUNDING ESCROW AGREEMENT
GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1987
THIS AGREEMENT, made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67,
Subdivision 13 (Act) and executed by and between the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota (City), and , Minnesota, a
banking corporation whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation and whose capital and surplus is not less than $500, 000 (Escrow Agent) :
WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto recite and, in consideration of the
mutual covenants contained herein, covenant and agree as follows :
1. The City, in accordance with resolutions adopted by its governing body
on December 13, 1994 and January 24, 1994, respectively entitled "Resolution
Providing For the Issuance and Sale of $575,000 General Obligation Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A" and "Resolution Awarding the Sale of
$ General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A;
Providing for their Form and Specifications Directing Their Execution and Delivery;
Providing for Their Payment; Providing for the Escrowing and Investment of the
Proceeds Thereof; and Providing for the Redemption of Bonds Refunded Thereby"
(Resolution), a certified copy of the latter of which has been filed with the Escrow
Agent, has provided for the refunding of certain outstanding general obligation
bonds (Refunded Bonds) of the City, described in said Resolutions, by the issuance
• and sale of refunding obligations, designated as "General Obligation Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994A" (Refunding Bonds).
2. The City has also, in accordance with the Resolutions, issued and sold
the Refunding Bonds in the principal amount of $ , and has
simultaneously invested the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds together with other
funds of the City in the amount of $ , (i) in the amount of $
in securities which are general obligations of the United States, securities
whose principal and interest payments are guaranteed by the United States, and
securities issued by agencies of the United States (collectively, the Federal
Securities), as described in the schedule which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit
A and made a part hereof, (ii) in the amount of $ as an initial cash
deposit, and (iii) in the amount of $ to be applied by Escrow Agent to
payment of costs of issuance as specified in paragraph 3 hereof and has irrevocably
deposited all such securities with the Escrow Agent on the date of this Agreement.
It is understood and agreed that the dates and amounts of payments of principal and
interest due on the securities so deposited are as indicated in Exhibit A, and that
the principal and interest payments due on such securities together with the initial
cash deposit are such as to provide the funds required to pay all interest payable
on the Refunding Bonds to the date on which any of the Refunded Bonds have been
directed to be prepaid, as stated in the Resolution and to pay the redemption price
of the Refunded Bonds on such date. The Refunded Bonds are the following:
a) $1,080,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds,- Series 1987,
dated September 1, 1987, of the City, of which $550,000 in principal amount
• is subject to redemption and prepayment on February 1, 1997.
SNG64497
RC145-260 1
?-38
• 3. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the securities described in
paragraph 2 hereof and agrees that it will hold such securities in a special escrow
account (Escrow Account) created by the Resolutions in the name of the City, and
will collect and receive on behalf of the City all payments of principal and interest
,on such securities and will remit from the Escrow Account (i) to the paying agent
(Paying Agent) for the Refunding Bonds the funds required from time to time for the
payment of interest on the Refunding Bonds to the date of the redemption of the
Refunded Bonds which is February 1, 1997 (Redemption Date); and (ii) to the
Paying Agent for the Refunded Bonds the funds needed for the redemption and
prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on the
Redemption Date. After provision for payment of all remaining Refunded Bonds, the
Escrow Agent will remit any remaining funds in the Escrow Account to the City. Of
the amounts deposited with the Escrow Agent, the sum of $ shall be
used by the Escrow Agent for the payment and disbursement of the costs of issuance
of the Refunding Bonds and payments to the City as set forth in Exhibit B attached
hereto.
4. In order to insure continuing compliance with the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, and regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively the
Code), the Escrow Agent agrees that it will not reinvest any cash received in
payment of-the principal of and interest on the Federal Securities held in the Escrow
Account. This prohibition on reinvestment shall continue unless and until an opinion
is received by Escrow Agent from nationally recognized bond counsel that
reinvestments, as specified in said opinion, may be made in a manner consistent with
the Code. Reinvestment, if any, of amounts in the Escrow Account made pursuant
to this paragraph may be made only in direct obligations of the United States of
• American which mature prior to the next date on which either principal or interest
on the Refunded Bonds is payable.
5. Escrow Agent expressly waives any lien upon or claim against the
moneys and investments in the Escrow Account.
6. If at any time it shall appear to the Escrow Agent that the money in the
Escrow Account allocable for such use hereunder will not be sufficient to make any
interest payment due to the holders of any of the Refunding Bonds, or principal
payment due to the holders of any of the Refunded Bonds, the Escrow Agent shall
immediately notify the City. The City thereupon shall forthwith deposit in Escrow
Account from funds on hand and legally available to it such additional funds as may
be required to meet fully the amount to become due and payable. The City
acknowledges its obligation to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the
City to the extent required to produce moneys necessary for this purpose. The City
and Escrow Agent acknowledge receipt of a verification report from Grant Thornton,
certified public accountants, dated , 19_, to the effect that such
cash and securities are sufficient to comply with the requirements of the Act.
7. The City will not repeal or amend the Resolution which calls the
Refunded Bonds for redemption on their Redemption Dates. The Escrow Agent shall
cause the Notice of Call for redemption attached hereto as Exhibit C to be mailed not
less than 45 days prior to the Redemption Date to the paying agent for the Refunded
Bonds for the purpose of giving notice not less than 30 days prior to the Redemption
Date to the registered owners of the Refunded Bonds to be redeemed, at their
addresses appearing in the bond register and also to the bank at which the principal
and interest on the Refunded Bonds are then payable.
SNC64497
RC145-260 2
6-39
• 8. On or before March 1, 1995, and on or before March 1 of each year
thereafter until termination of the Escrow Account, the Escrow Agent shall submit
to the City a report covering all money it shall have received and all payments it
shall have made or caused to be made hereunder during the preceding twelve
months. Such report shall also list all obligations held in the Escrow Account and
the amount of money on hand in the Escrow Account on February 1 of each year.
9. It is recognized and agreed that title to the Federal Securities and cash,
if any, held in the Escrow Account from time to time shall remain vested in the City
but subject always to the prior charge and lien thereon of this Agreement and the
use thereof required to be made by this Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall hold
all such money and obligations in a special trust fund and account separate and
wholly segregated from all other funds and securities of the Escrow Agent, and shall
never commingle such money or securities with other money or securities; provided,
however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require the Escrow
Agent to keep the identical monies, or any part thereof, received for the Escrow
Account on hand, but moneys of an equal amount (except to the extent such are
represented- by investments permitted under this Agreement) shall always be
maintained on hand as funds held by the Escrow Agent as trustee, belonging to the
City, and a special account shall at all times be maintained on the books of the
Escrow Agent, together with such investments. In the event of the Escrow Agent's
failure to account for any money or obligations held by it in the Escrow Account,
such money and obligations shall be and remain the property of the City, and if for
any reason such money or obligations cannot be identified, all other assets of the
Escrow Agent shall be impressed with a trust for the amount thereof, and the City
shall be entitled to a preferred claim upon such assets. It is understood and agreed
40 that the responsibility of the Escrow Agent under this Agreement is limited to the
safekeeping and segregation of the funds and securities deposited with it in the
Escrow Account, and the collection of and accounting for the principal and interest
payable with respect thereto.
10. This Agreement is made by the City for the benefit of the holders of the
Refunded Bonds, and is not revocable by the City, and the investments and other
funds deposited in the Escrow Account and all income therefrom have been
irrevocably appropriated for the payment of the callable principal amount of the
Refunded Bonds at the Redemption Date and interest on the Refunding Bonds to the
Redemption Date in accordance with this Agreement.
11. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
the City and the Escrow Agent and their respective successors and assigns. In
addition, this Agreement shall constitute a third party beneficiary contract for the
benefit of the holders of the Refunded Bonds and said third party beneficiaries shall
be entitled to enforce performance and observance by the City and the Escrow Agent
of the respective agreements and covenants herein contained as fully and completely
as if said third party beneficiaries were parties hereto. Any bank into which the
Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be consolidated or any bank
resulting from any merger or consolidation to.which it shall be a party or any bank
to which it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its corporate trust business
shall, if the City approves, be the successor agent without the execution of any
document or the performance of any further act.
12. The Escrow Agent may at any time resign and be discharged of its
is obligations hereunder by giving to the City Manager of the City written notice of
such resignation not less than 60 days before the date when the same is to take effect
SP06`697
RC145-260 3
• and by publication of a copy of such notice in a daily or weekly Minnesota newspaper
published in a Minnesota City of the first class, or its metropolitan area, which
circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as part of its service,
not less than 30 days prior to such date; provided that the Escrow Agent shall
return to the County the pro rata portion of its fee which is allocable to the period
of time commencing on the effective date of such resignation. Such resignation shall
take effect upon the date specified in the notice, or upon the appointment and
qualification of a successor prior to that date. In the event of such resignation, a
successor shall promptly be appointed by the City, and the City Manager of the City
shall immediately give written notice thereof to the predecessor escrow agent and
publish the notice in the manner described in this paragraph 12. If, in a proper
case, no appointment of a successor agent is made within 45 days after the receipt
by the City of notice of such resignation, the Escrow Agent or the holder of any
Refunded Bond may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction to appoint a
successor escrow agent, which appointment may be made by the Court after such
notice, if any, as the Court may prescribe. Any successor escrow agent appointed
hereunder shall execute, acknowledge and deliver to its predecessor escrow agent
and to the City a written acceptance of such appointment, and shall thereupon
without any further act, deed or conveyance become fully vested with all moneys,
properties, duties and obligations of its predecessor, but the predecessor shall
nevertheless pay over, transfer, assign and deliver all moneys, securities or other
property held by it to the successor escrow agent, shall execute, acknowledge and
deliver such instruments of conveyance and do such other things as may reasonably
be required to vest and confirm more fully and certainly in the successor escrow
agent all right, title and interest in and to any property held by it hereunder. Any
bank into which the Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be
• consolidated or any bank resulting from any merger or consolidation to which it shall
be a party or any bank to which it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its
corporate trust business shall, if the City approves, be the successor escrow agent
without the execution of any document or the performance of any further act.
13. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the sum of $
as its full compensation for its services to be performed under this Agreement.
14. Any notice, authorization, request or demand required or permitted to
be given in accordance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and sent
by registered or certified mail addressed:
If to the City: City of Richfield, Minnesota
6700 Portland Avenue South
Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2598
Attn: City Manager
If to the Escrow Agent:
Attn: Corporate Trust Department
15. The exhibits which are a part of this Agreement are as follows:
Exhibit A Federal Securities
Exhibit B Costs of Issuance
S Exhibit C Notice of Call for Redemption
SN064497
RC145-260 4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
duly executed by their duly authorized officers, in counterparts, each of which is
deemed to be an original agreement, on this _ day of , 1994.
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
0
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
Attest :
By
Its City Manager
By
Its Corporate Trust Officer
SNG64497
RC145-260 rj
EXHIBIT C
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$1,080,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1987
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, there have been called for redemption and
prepayment on
February 1, 1997
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Improvement
Bonds of 1987, dated September 1, 1987, having stated maturity dates of February 1
in the years 1998 through 2008, both inclusive, totalling $550,000 in principal
amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers :
Year of Maturity CUSIP
1998 763325 VS3
1999 763325 VT1
2000 763325 VU8
2001 763325 VV6
2002 763325 VW4
2003 763325 VX2
2004 763325 VYO
2005 763325 VZ7
2006 763325 WA1
2007 763325 WB9
2008 763325 WC7
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to.February 1,
1997, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to -accrue. Holders of the
bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment
at the main office of National City Bank of Minneapolis, in the City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota, on or before February 1, 1997.
The Trustee shall not be responsible for the selection or use of the CUSIP
number, nor is any representation made as to the correctness indicated in the
Redemption Notice or on any Bond. It is included solely for convenience of the
Holders.
Dated: January 24, 1994.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
By /s/ James Prosser -
City Manager
. City of Richfield, Minnesota
Further Information:
SN064497
RC145-260 6
q,3
• REFUNDING ESCROW AGREEMENT
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1988
THIS AGREEMENT, made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67,
Subdivision 13 (Act) and executed by and between the City of Richfield, Hennepin
County, Minnesota (City), and , Minnesota, a
banking corporation whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation and whose capital and surplus is not less than $500,000 (Escrow Agent) :
WITNESSETH: That the parties hereto recite and, in consideration of the
mutual covenants contained herein, covenant and agree as follows :
1. The City, in accordance with resolutions adopted by its governing body
on December 13, 1993 and January 24, 1994, respectively entitled "Resolution
Providing For the Issuance and Sale of $2,790,000 General Obligation Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B" and "Resolution Awarding the Sale of
$ General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B;
Providing for their Form and Specifications Directing Their Execution and Delivery;
Providing for Their Payment; Providing for the Escrowing and Investment of the
Proceeds Thereof; and Providing for the Redemption of Bonds Refunded Thereby"
(Resolution), a certified copy of the latter of which has been filed with the Escrow
Agent, has provided for the refunding of certain outstanding general obligation
bonds (Refunded Bonds) of the City, described in said Resolutions, by the issuance
. and sale of refunding obligations, designated as "General Obligation Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series 1994B" (Refunding Bonds).
2. The City has also, in accordance with the Resolutions, issued and sold
the Refunding Bonds in the principal amount of $ , and has
simultaneously invested the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds together with other
funds of the City in the amount of $ , (1) in the amount of $
in securities which are general obligations of the United States, securities
whose principal and interest payments are guaranteed by the United States, and
securities issued by agencies of the United States (collectively, the Federal
Securities), as described in the schedule which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit
A and made a part hereof, (ii) in the amount of $ as an initial cash
deposit, and (iii) in the amount of $ to be applied by Escrow Agent to
payment of costs of issuance as specified in paragraph 3 hereof and has irrevocably
deposited all such securities with the Escrow Agent on the date of this Agreement.
It is understood and agreed that the dates and amounts of payments of principal and
interest due on the securities so deposited are as indicated in Exhibit A, and that
the principal and interest payments due on such securities together with the initial
cash deposit are such as to provide the funds required to pay all interest payable
on the Refunding Bonds to the date on which any of the Refunded Bonds have been
directed to be prepaid, as stated in the Resolution and to pay the redemption price
of the Refunded Bonds on such date. The Refunded Bonds are the following:
a) $4,555,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds of
1988, dated October 1, 1988, of the City, of which $2,720,000 in principal
• amount is subject to redemption and prepayment on February 1, 1997.
SN964521
RC145-260 1
c4q
3. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the securities described in
paragraph 2 hereof and agrees that it will hold such securities in a special escrow
account (Escrow Account) created by the Resolutions in the name of the City, and
will collect and receive on behalf of the City all payments of principal and interest
on such securities and will remit from the Escrow Account (i) to the paying agent
(Paying Agent) for the Refunding Bonds the funds required from time to time for the
payment of interest on the Refunding Bonds to the date of the redemption of the
Refunded Bonds which is February 1, 1997 (Redemption Date); and (ii) to the
Paying Agent for the Refunded Bonds the funds needed for the redemption and
prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Refunded Bonds on the
Redemption Date. After provision for payment of all remaining Refunded Bonds, the
Escrow Agent will remit any remaining funds in the Escrow Account to the City. Of
the amounts deposited with the Escrow Agent, the sum of $ shall be
used by the Escrow Agent for the payment and disbursement of the costs of issuance
of the Refunding Bonds and payments to the City as set forth in Exhibit B attached
hereto.
4. In order to insure continuing compliance with the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, as amended, and regulations promulgated thereunder (collectively the
Code), the Escrow Agent agrees that it will not reinvest any cash received in
payment of the principal of and interest on the Federal Securities held in the Escrow
Account. This prohibition on reinvestment shall continue unless and until an opinion
is received by Escrow Agent from nationally recognized bond counsel that
reinvestments, as specified in said opinion, may be made in a manner consistent with
the Code. Reinvestment, if any, of amounts in the Escrow Account made pursuant
to this paragraph may be made only in direct obligations of the United States of
is American which mature prior to the next date on which either principal or interest
on the Refunded Bonds is payable.
5. Escrow Agent expressly waives any lien upon or claim against the
moneys and investments in the Escrow Account.
6. If at any time it shall appear to the Escrow Agent that the money in the
Escrow Account allocable for such use hereunder will not be sufficient to make any
interest payment due to the holders of any of the Refunding Bonds, or principal
payment due to the holders of any of the Refunded Bonds, the Escrow Agent shall
immediately notify the City. The City thereupon shall forthwith deposit in Escrow
Account from funds on hand and legally available to it such additional funds as may
be required to meet fully the amount to become due and payable. The City
acknowledges its obligation to levy ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the
City to the extent required to produce moneys necessary for this purpose. The City
and Escrow Agent acknowledge receipt of a verification report from Grant Thornton,
certified public accountants, dated , 19_, to the effect that such
cash and securities are sufficient to comply with the requirements of the Act.
7. The City will not repeal or amend the Resolution which calls the
Refunded Bonds for redemption on their Redemption Dates. The Escrow Agent shall
cause the Notice of Call for redemption attached hereto as Exhibit C to be mailed not
less than 45 days prior to the Redemption Date to the paying agent for the Refunded
Bonds for the purpose of giving notice not less than 30 days prior to the Redemption
Date to the registered owners of the Refunded Bonds to be redeemed, at their
addresses appearing in the bond register and also to the bank at which the principal
• and interest on the Refunded Bonds are then payable.
8N064521
RC145-260 2
8. On or before March 1, 1995, and on or before March 1 of each year
thereafter until termination of the Escrow Account, the Escrow Agent shall submit
to the City a report covering all money it shall have received and all payments it
shall have made or caused to be made hereunder during the preceding twelve
months. Such report shall also list all obligations held in the Escrow Account and
the amount of money on hand in the Escrow Account on February 1 of each year.
9. It is recognized and agreed that title to the Federal Securities and cash,
if any, held in the Escrow Account from time to time shall remain vested in the City
but subject always to the prior charge and lien thereon of this Agreement and the
use thereof required to be made by this Agreement. The Escrow Agent shall hold
all such money and obligations in a special trust fund and account separate and
wholly segregated from all other funds and securities of the Escrow Agent, and shall
never commingle such money or securities with other money or securities; provided,
however, that nothing herein contained shall be construed to require the Escrow
Agent to keep the identical monies, or any part thereof, received for the Escrow
Account on hand, but moneys of an equal amount (except to the extent such are
represented by investments permitted under this Agreement) shall always be
maintained on hand as funds held by the Escrow Agent as trustee, belonging to the
City, and a special account shall at all times be maintained on the books of the
Escrow Agent, together with such investments. In the event of the Escrow Agent's
failure to account for any money or obligations held by it in the Escrow Account,
such money and obligations shall be and remain the property of the City, and if for
any reason such money or obligations cannot be identified, all other assets of the
Escrow Agent shall be impressed with a trust for the amount thereof, and the City
shall be entitled to a preferred claim upon such assets. It is understood and agreed
• that the responsibility of the Escrow Agent under this Agreement is limited to the
safekeeping and segregation of the funds and securities deposited with it in the
Escrow Account, and the collection of and accounting for the principal and interest
payable with respect thereto.
10. This Agreement is made by the City for the benefit of the holders of the
Refunded Bonds, and is not revocable by the City, and the investments and other
funds deposited in the Escrow Account and all income therefrom have been
irrevocably appropriated for the payment of the callable principal amount of the
Refunded Bonds at the Redemption Date and interest on the Refunding Bonds to the
Redemption Date in accordance with this Agreement.
11. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
the City and the Escrow Agent and their respective successors and assigns. In
addition, this Agreement shall constitute a third party beneficiary contract for the
benefit of the holders of the Refunded Bonds and said third party beneficiaries shall
be entitled to enforce performance and observance by the City and the Escrow Agent
of the respective agreements and covenants herein contained as fully and completely
as if said third party beneficiaries were parties hereto. Any bank into which the
Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be consolidated or any bank
resulting from any merger or consolidation to which it shall be a party or any bank
to which. it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its corporate trust business
shall, if the City approves, be the successor agent without the execution of any
document or the performance of any further act.
12. The Escrow Agent may at any time resign and be discharged of its
obligations hereunder by giving to the City Manager of the City written notice of
such resignation not less than 60 days before the date when the same is to take effect
SNG64521
RC145-260 3
. and by publication of a copy of such notice in a daily or weekly Minnesota newspaper
published in a Minnesota City of the first class, or its metropolitan area, which
circulates throughout the state and furnishes financial news as part of its service,
not less than 30 days prior to such date; provided that the Escrow Agent shall
return to the County the pro rata portion of its fee which is allocable to the period
of time commencing on the effective date of such resignation. Such resignation shall
take effect upon the date specified in the notice, or upon the appointment and
qualification of a successor prior to that date. In the event of such resignation, a
successor shall promptly be appointed by the City, and the City Manager of the City
shall immediately give written notice thereof to the predecessor escrow agent and
publish the notice in the manner described in this paragraph 12. If, in a proper
case, no appointment of a successor agent is made within 45 days after the receipt
by the City of notice of such resignation, the Escrow Agent or the holder of any
Refunded Bond may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction to appoint a
successor escrow agent, which appointment may be made by the Court after such
notice, if any, as the Court may prescribe. Any successor escrow agent appointed
hereunder shall execute, acknowledge and deliver to its predecessor escrow agent
and to the City a written acceptance of such appointment, and shall thereupon
without any further act, deed or conveyance become fully vested with all moneys,
properties, duties and obligations of its predecessor, but the predecessor shall
nevertheless pay over, transfer, assign and deliver all moneys, securities or other
property held by it to the successor escrow agent, shall execute, acknowledge and
deliver such instruments of conveyance and do such other things as may reasonably
be required to vest and confirm more fully and certainly in the successor escrow
agent all right, title and interest in and to any property held by it hereunder. Any
bank into which the Escrow Agent may be merged or with which it may be
consolidated or any bank resulting from any merger or consolidation to which it shall
be a party or any bank to which it may sell or transfer all or substantially all of its
corporate trust business shall, if the City approves, be the successor escrow agent
without the execution of any document or the performance of any further act.
13. The Escrow Agent acknowledges receipt of the sum of $
as its full compensation for its services to be performed under this Agreement.
14. Any notice, authorization, request or demand required or permitted to
be given in accordance with the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and sent
by registered or certified mail addressed:
If to the City: City of Richfield, Minnesota
6700 Portland Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55423-2598
Attn: City Manager
If to the Escrow Agent:
Attn: Corporate Trust Department
15. The exhibits which are a part of this Agreement are as follows:
Exhibit A Federal Securities
• Exhibit B Costs of Issuance
Exhibit C Notice of Call for Redemption
SN064521
RC145-260 4
6"q)
• IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be
duly executed by their duly authorized officers, in counterparts, each of which is
deemed to be an original agreement, on this _ day of , 1994.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
n
U
By
Its Mayor
Attest :
By
Its City Manager
By
Its Corporate Trust Officer
SN064521
RC145-260 5
?- qx
0 EXHIBIT C
NOTICE OF CALL FOR REDEMPTION
$4,555,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1988
CITY OF RICHFIELD
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, by order of the City Council of the City of
Richfield, Hennepin County, Minnesota, there have been called for.redemption and
prepayment on
February 1, 1997
all outstanding bonds of the City designated as General Obligation Refunding
Improvement Bonds of 1988, dated October 1, 1988, having stated maturity dates of
February 1 in the years 1998 through 2004, both inclusive, totalling $2,720,000 in
principal amount, and with the following CUSIP numbers:
Year of Maturity CUSIP
1998 763325 XH5
1999 763325 XK8
2000 763325 XM4
2001 763325 XN2
2002 763325 XP7
2003 763325 XQ5
2004 763325 XR3
The bonds are being called at a price of par plus accrued interest to February 1,
1997, on which date all interest on said bonds will cease to accrue. Holders of the
bonds hereby called for redemption are requested to present their bonds for payment
at the main office of National City Bank of Minneapolis, in the City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota, on or before February 1, 1997.
The Registrar shall not be responsible for the selection or use of the CUSIP
number, nor is any representation made as to the correctness indicated in the
Redemption Notice or on any Bond. It is included solely for convenience of the
Holders.
Dated: January 24, 1994.
0 Further. Information:
BY ORDER OF THE, CITY COUNCIL
By /s/ James Prosser
City Manager
City of Richfield, Minnesota
BNG64521
RC145-260 6
M
4-
O
T-
LU
C?
?O q
? r
M ?
r r
M M
N N
r e?
X
Q
?t
m
0
r
O
Mco cn
r- o °
N O m
C
co a
CO m
N
l11 L r'
N C
N
O
U- N
O >
fn U Q..
?o
cn L
o
Lu co
w ti ca
JN.LM
Q m
z O
L
c
C?
U
O
V
_so
?LM
Z
Q o
3s a
L
V
N Ln C
r O S
tf! r <
r-7
I
L I
c}'
d
N
O
Z Q
L
?
2 OOUOaoo oo
3 A T-
?
w 0 Mt'.00T-
MMMCh??? 0cn
00 co
m cYi ri
C LO
O
O I
N
69.
0000 T- NM
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N
Q
LU
o ii.i 0000000 -;j 4-;
(
U 0000000 cn
n
pp 0000000 00
Q F- LO LO uS V) ui o 0 U U
. 0 LO? LO? N N
Z
O O
Z 2 c c
Z C
I.- i
M
4-
O
N
W
C7
•
0
Q.
O
U
.Q
?10 co
Tr qT
M er
r r
M M
N N
X
uQ.
so
w?
o LM
v Z
O ?
> N
? Q o
3 s o.
N lA =
r- o
ILn
J
N_
O
m:
rn °
? r
r N
N
N N
Z U)
co Cri
C y C
Co C O
C m
J cm
C
u) :2
LL O
0 ?- O
U ?
ry a
J "- N
O
c N
U o
Q.
Qo°Oa
0
o
Z rn m
N _L m
W
Q? 0
0 ca
C
N
CD
O 000008-11 0 0 0
Y °
)C
N co
CO 'CDa
d
D
N co
Y
CY)
MC*) Md'44 a
co 13?
L co cM
c ?
?.
? N C CQ O 0 \ 0 0 0 \ 0 \ 0 \ 0
\\\ 0 0
\\
ccs-012-5-x O OU') CD LO 0LO CD r-M
CL (D C C O
l tf)CDCO OrN V, NM
Cm t
- MMMMd 4d mm
C L M C (n
N O M M
C
U- M
a) 006
0 ?M?C-)
.. E :3
?
Q?0pO.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M M
ca (n 00 LO ? M O T.- N N M 01)
co C CD CM C7C6'IT44-4 W W
J O co M
co ti
/?
V/
O
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
° U) CD 00000 000o
Cl) N U') I - Co co 00 co co r CD
i
Lf)
CM C5CY5 vi MMM
j?
M M
•L
ca cl?
2
° 000000 00
N ° O?
O co lLO I- c
o(MON LO
m N Ch M eM C•i a ? ?
co U) C7 cM
C ti
U N
6%
C
° 00000 -0-00 00
° ooLO 00LO 0 CD OM
O O (D P.- OOrM MLO
M (M CMMCi4 q:4 00 CC)
o M M
co
ti
c:
.
N
? EIi
COOCD rNM
Q 0 0 0 0 0 0
rnrn00000
} r r N N N N N
Lij 0
0 0 U U
Q U Q C)
0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z E-
U Z
M C
00NN
a N CDD
D 0 Lo cr cn cn
Q
?
m
cc
Q0)
N
N
a
N
O1
C
c4
L
U
N
c6
L
C
O
O
E
m
Q
U
C
M
U-
0
M
w
0
?D CO
et C
M ?
r- r
-T Rt
m M
N N
X
Q
m
0)
d7 ?
o
a)
co Cf)
O
C
U) U)
c
0
ca cm
J .O .C
c
? U N
cl) `~ C
O
J >
E
,
U a?
C/)
00 a
?- o E
Q?c
Z I? O
LM
UJ o
a m
a)
c
a)
C7
.
V
_
_sc
;Q
?. N `n
Le)
L
O v ?+ Z
V >N
o
3 s
? sZ
v '`
N lA C
C
r O
?J
rn
N
? O
N \ \ \°
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r N
` L6 LO 1- 00 0 T- cV cM O t(?
cyivicMePCd'd'
M
? N
E fl3
U
Y
( O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 O)?
N 0
Lor-000 N CO
cND M M M d d d.d 0 Cl
a) L d
C
O N
cv
O 00 000 00 0 0
a ° 0000000 00 C0
LO I- MC) -M LO ?m
C MMMd d ?Pd 0CD ID
0
Y ti 44
c
o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3
•- 0 0 0 0 0 0 LO
- N C0
M
M In N
LO 1? CO O T
MM M4 d d co c
m C)
co O)O
O N M d'
O ti
N
U
O 0000?010 0?
o O
I- MO?M ?
Ch L
j
gT V-
N n U'0
(D cc N CMM C6gq:444 ?O
jfl
) co
Mgt
a) N
Cc
Q O O 6H
`
a
0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
C,
E - a LO LO
M?
O
O M
' O
O O
N N
) O O
w
uD
o C7C'iC' mm- q'qq: m C)
U) a)
N- C'7 4
o cc U)
J
Y ?
_
>
Z
00d7CD T- N M
8
Q 470)0000
u j 0)0)00000
04 N N N N
u.i LU 0000000 UU
Q U z ck 00
O O
o
o
O o
0 O o
z
.
_
_
_
_
0 0 LO LO CD C) CD
0 LO LO LO
Q
?
0
co
Q.
a)
a)
N
a
a)
t?
c
C6
U
ca
O
E
o.
c
c`
5
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No.40
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Resolution approving extension of maturity of Commercial
Development Revenue Bond (Richfield Shoppes Developers Project).
Background:
Commercial •Development Revenue Bonds for the Richfield Shoppes
Developers Project were issued in 1983 in the amount of
$4,350,000. The bonds were sold to what is now Norwest Bank
Minnesota, National Association. The proceeds were loaned to
Richfield Shoppes Developers to finance a retail facility in
Richfield. The City of Richfield's role in the bond transaction
is as a conduit for the issuance of an Industrial Revenue Bond.
The City has no liability in the bond issue.
The original Loan and Bond Purchase Agreement, dated October 1,
1983, called for the maturity of this bond in October 1993.
However both parties, the borrower and bondholder, have requested
that the City extend the maturity of the bond by continuing the
amortization of the unpaid principal of the bond in monthly
installments provided in the bond. This amendment would permit
the continued amortization for the note until all principal is
• paid, which will be an extension of approximately 15 years to
final maturity. Miller and Schroeder Financial, Inc. has agreed
to purchase and market the amended note.
The action requested of the City is to:
1. Approve the extension of the maturity of the bond by
continuation of the amortization of the remaining unpaid
principal at the interest rate specified in the bond in
monthly installments in the amount provided in the bond.
This extension would continue until the date on which all
unpaid principal of and interest on the bond is paid, or, if
earlier, until March 1, 2009, when all unpaid principal and
interest of the bond shall be paid, and
2. Approve any amendments to the loan agreement and the bond
necessary to reflect the extension of maturity authorized
above, and
3. Authorize the Mayor and other City officers to execute such
amendments on behalf of the City as shall be approved by
legal counsel to the City:
This action does not require a public hearing.
Recommended Motion:
• Adopt the attached resolution approving extension of maturity of
Commercial Development Revenue Bond (Richfield Shoppes Developers
Project).
5-1
0 Basis for Recommendation:
1. The borrower (Richfield Shoppes Developers) and the
bondholder (now Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association)
have requested the extension of maturity.
2. The extension of maturity is beneficial to the Richfield
Shoppes retail facility.
3. As issuers of the Commercial Development Revenue Bond for the
Richfield Shoppes Project, the City of Richfield has no
liability in this bond issue or the extension of maturity.
4. The City's legal bond counsel, Mr. David Kennedy, has
reviewed the requested extension of maturity for the bond and
sees no reason not to approve the request.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could reject the extension of maturity
request. This would require new financing for the Richfield
Shoppes Project.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action on this extension is requested at the January 24, 1994
City Council meeting in order to establish the extended maturity.
as soon as possible. The original maturity expired in October
• 1993.
Respectfugly submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City anacrer
JDP:ds
0
5-i
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING EXTENSION OF MATURITY OF
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND
(RICHFIELD SHOPPES DEVELOPERS PROJECT)
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has heretofore issued its
Commercial Development Revenue Bond (Richfield Shoppes Developers
Project) (the "Bond"), sold the Bond to Norwest Bank Minneapolis,
National Association (now Norwest Bank Minnesota, National
Association) (the "Bondholder"), and loaned the proceeds of the
Bond to Richfield Shoppes Developers, a Minnesota general
partnership (the "Borrower"), to finance a retail facility in the
City, all pursuant to a Loan and Bond Purchase Agreement dated as
of October 1, 1983 (the "Loan Agreement"); and
WHEREAS, the Borrower and the Bondholder have requested the
City to extend the maturity of the Bond by continuing the
amortization of the unpaid principal of the Bond in monthly
installments as provided in the Bond.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City hereby approves the extension of the maturity
of the Bond by continuing the amortization of the remaining
unpaid principal of the Bond at the rate of interest specified in
the Bond in monthly installments in the amount provided in the
Bond, until the date on which all unpaid principal of and
interest on the Bond is paid, or, if earlier, until March 1,
2009, when all unpaid principal of and interest on the Bond shall
be paid.
2. The City further approves any amendments to the Loan
Agreement and the Bond necessary to reflect the extension of
maturity authorized hereby, and the Mayor and other City officers
are authorized and directed to execute on behalf of the City any
such amendments as shall be approved by counsel to the City.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 24th day of January, 1994.
ATTEST:
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
0
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 39
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Application for?an exemption from a lawful gambling license for
St. Peter's Church, 6730 Nicollet Avenue.
Background:
On January .13, 1994, the Church of St. Peter's submitted an
application for an exemption from lawful gambling license. This
exemption allows them five dates per calendar year in which they
are allowed to hold bingo. They have surrendered their gambling
license effective December 29, 1993 as they are no longer
interested in having bingo on a regular basis.
The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on March 5 and March
26, 1994, from 7 p.m. to 11 p.m. The pulltabs will not be used
during these two days.
The Public Safety Department has conducted the required
background investigation and has determined that the applicant
has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling
manager, Mr. Donald Jarvis; has no known criminal record.
10 Finally, the applicant is requesting that the $100 investigation
fee be waived.
Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department
to review the request for the exemption from gambling license and
make its review and recommendation to the City Council.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving of
the exemption from lawful gambling activity requested by the
applicant inaccordance with Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6.
Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation
fee.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City
Code pertaining to lawful gambling.
2. The request for exemption from a lawful gambling license has
been submitted prior to 30 days of their first proposed bingo
date.
3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity
requested is a benefit to the community.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving
the request, however, staff has determined that there is no
basis for this alternative.
2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approve the application of St. Peter's exemption from lawful
gambling and request for waiver of the investigative fee.
Respe t ly submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
40
0
qL-,a-
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR
THE CHURCH OF ST. PETER'S
WHEREAS, the Church of St. Peter's has submitted an
application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and
WHEREAS, the application request renewal for their bingo and
pulltab operations; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides
authority for review of applications by local authorities; and
WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City Code provides
for regulation of lawful gambling; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an
investigation of the application and finds the application to be
in order;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council,
City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the Church
of St. Peters, 6730 Nicollet Avenue.
2. That the investigation fee be waived.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 24th day of January, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
qK
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 38
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Application for lawful gambling license for Richfield American
Legion #435, 6501 Portland Avenue.
Background:
On January •10, 1994, the Richfield American Legion submitted an
application for renewal of their lawful gambling license. The
application requests renewal for their bingo and pulltab
operations.
The applicant is proposing to conduct bingo on Sundays from 12
p.m. to 5 p.m. The pulltabs would be conducted in conjunction
with the bingo operation.
The Public Safety Department has conducted the required
background investigation and has determined that the applicant
has complied with all requirements. In addition, the gambling
manager, Mr. Rodney Logland, has no known criminal record.
Finally, the applicant is requesting that the $100 investigation
fee be waived.
Richfield City Code 1100.13 requires the Public Safety Department
to review the request for the gambling license and make its
review and recommendation to the City Council.
Recommended Motion:
Staff recommends that the Council pass a resolution approving the
gambling activity requested by the applicant inaccordance with
Richfield City Code 1100.13, subd. 6.
Staff further recommends that the Council waive the investigation
fee.
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The applicant has complied with the State Statutes and City
Code pertaining to lawful gambling.
2. The applicant has submitted the request within 60 days of the
renewal of the license.
3. The applicant has demonstrated that the gambling activity
requested is a benefit to the community.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The Council could pass a resolution specifically disapproving
the renewal request, however, staff has determined that there
is no basis for this alternative.
2. The Council could decide to not waive the investigative fee.
kK-I
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approve the renewal of Richfield American Legion #435's lawful
gambling application and a request for waiver of the
investigative fee.
Respect lly submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
Cit anager
JDP:ds
9
qK-aL
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR
THE'RICHFIELD AMERICAN LEGION #435
WHEREAS, the American Legion #435 has submitted an
application for renewal of their lawful gambling license; and
WHEREAS, the application request renewal for their bingo
and pulltab operations; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 349.213 provides
authority for review of applications by local authorities; and
WHEREAS, Section 1100.13 of the Richfield City Code
provides for regulation of lawful gambling; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety has completed an
investigation of the application and finds the application to be
in order;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council,
City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
• 1. That a lawful gambling license be granted to the
Richfield American Legion #435, 6501 Portland Avenue.
2. That the investigation fee be waived.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 24th day of January, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
0
qs
10 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 37
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for a mini passenger van for use by
the Engineering Division.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
Unit #274, a 1984 Ford full size 3/4 ton van used by the
Engineering Division, was fully depreciated in 1990. The
condition of vehicles is reviewed annually and it was determined
the City could extend the use of this vehicle. Unit #274 is now
scheduled for replacement in 1994. Purchase of a replacement
vehicle has been coordinated with the Hennepin County bid
process. The replacement vehicle is downsized to a mini van.
The approved 1994 Central Garage budget contains funds for the
purchase of this vehicle.
Recommended Motion:
Approve a purchase order to Superior Ford for a Ford Aerostar
Mini Passenger Van in the sum of $14,390.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Unit #274, currently in the motor pool, is fully depreciated
and due to be replaced in 1994.
2. Purchasing vehicles through County contracts assures the
lowest possible price for the type of vehicle required.
3. There are adequate funds in the approved 1994 Central Garage
capital outlay budget for this purchase.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose to deny approval and direct staff to obtain
new bids for.this vehicle. However, staff does not believe a
lower price can be obtained from a reputable dealer than through
the Hennepin County contract.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval is requested at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
ly submitted,
Resp7anagaer
Jamerosser
City JDP:ds
yZ
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 36
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for a 1/2 ton pickup truck for use by
the Government Buildings Maintenance Division.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when
the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction
exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority'to purchase shall be
submitted to the City Council for consideration.
Unit #296, a 1986 Chevrolet 1/2 ton pickup truck used by the
Government Buildings Maintenance Division, was fully depreciated in
1991. The condition of vehicles is reviewed annually and it was
determined the City could extend the use of this vehicle. Unit
#296 is now scheduled for replacement in 1994. Purchase of a
replacement vehicle has been coordinated with the Hennepin County
bid process. The replacement vehicle will use diesel fuel while
the current unit is gasoline operated. Diesel fuel is being used
in some City equipment to reduce operating costs. The approved
1994 Central Garage budget contains funds for the purchase of this
vehicle.
Recommended Motion:
• Approve a purchase order to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet, Inc. for
a 4 X 2 Chevrolet 1/2 ton diesel pickup truck in the sum of
$13,783.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Unit #296, currently in the motor pool, is fully depreciated
and due to be replaced in 1994.
2. Purchasing vehicles through County contracts assures the lowest
possible price for the type of vehicle required.
3. There are adequate funds in the approved 1994 Central Garage
capital outlay budget for this purchase.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose to deny approval and direct staff to obtain
new bids for this vehicle. However, staff does not believe a lower
price can be obtained from a reputable dealer than through the
Hennepin County contract.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval is requested at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
Resp t y submitted,
•
James D. Prosser
City pager
JDP:ds
qP
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 35
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for a 1/2 ton 4 X 4 pickup truck for
use by the Street Maintenance Division.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when
the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction
exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be
submitted to the City Council for consideration.
Unit #299, a 1986 Chevrolet 3/4 ton 4 X 4 pickup truck, which is a
Streets Division vehicle, was fully depreciated in 1991. The
condition of vehicles is reviewed annually and it was determined
the City could extend the use of this vehicle. Unit #299, used by
the Street Supervisor, has now been scheduled for replacement in
1994. Purchase of a replacement vehicle has been coordinated with
the Hennepin County bid process. The replacement vehicle is
downsized from the current unit. The replacement vehicle will use
diesel fuel while the current unit is gasoline operated. Diesel
fuel is being used in some City equipment to reduce operating
costs. The approved 1994 Central Garage budget contains funds for
the purchase of this vehicle.
Recommended Motion:
Approve a purchase order to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet, Inc. for
a Chevrolet 1/2 ton diesel pickup truck in the sum of $16,007.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Unit #299, currently in the motor pool, is fully depreciated
and due to be replaced in 1994.
2. Purchasing vehicles through County contracts assures the lowest
possible price for the type of vehicle required.
3. There are adequate funds in the approved 1994 Central Garage
capital outlay budget for this purchase.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose to deny approval and direct staff to obtain
new bids for this vehicle. However, staff does not believe a lower
price can be obtained from a reputable dealer than through the
Hennepin County contract.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval is requested at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
Resp ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
4&
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 34
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for the 1993 Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) Water Appropriation Permit.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that
when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or
construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase
shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
The City is required by Minnesota State Law to purchase an annual
Water Appropriation Permit to allow the City to extract water
from seven deep wells. The permit fee is based on total water
usage in 1993, and approximately 1,144 million gallons were
extracted from City wells.
The permit fee for the 1992 Water Appropriation permit was
$5,345. The total permit for 1993 is $5,149.94, a decrease of
approximately $195.
Recommended Motion:
Approve a 1994 purchase order to the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources for the 1993 Water Appropriation Permit in the
amount of $5,149.94.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Minnesota State law requires each city to purchase a Water
Appropriation'Permit for water extraction.
2. There is $6,500 allocated in the 1994 Water Maintenance
budget for the permit.
Alternative Recommendation:
Because the Water Appropriation Permit is required by State law,
there is no alternative recommendation.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests approval at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
JamYanagaer-
City JD
0 rosser
CIF
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 33
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for installation of an infra-red
heating system in the new wash stall area of the Central Garage.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when
the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction
exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be
submitted to the City Council for consideration.
The Central Garage facility was divided into two separate buildings
due to the 77th Street Construction Project. As a result, the then
existing wash stall area was demolished and relocated to Garage
North. The current 30 year old heating system in the wash stall
area does not provide consistent, efficient, and safe heat thereby
creating a risk of damage to the plumbing system. The infra-red
heating system would provide an efficient and up-to-date heating
supply.
Quotations were requested and received from two vendors with the
following results:
Midland Heating & Air Conditioning $10,800
• Seasonal Control, Inc. 11,300
Recommended Motion:
Approve a 1994 purchase order in the amount of $10,800 to Midland
Heating & Air Conditioning for the installation of an infra-red
heating system.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The City uses similar infra-red heating systems in various
buildings with satisfactory results.
2. Midland Heating & Air Conditioning submitted the lowest
quotation.
3. Funds are allocated through the 77th Street Garage Demolition
Project.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose not to accept any of the quotations and instruct
staff to obtain new quotes.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item is on the consent calendar of the January 24, 1994
Council meeting. 'Staff requests approval at this time.
. Res 7 u ly submitted,
Jame Prosser
City pager
JDP:ds
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 32
Agenda.January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Purchase in excess of $5,000 for Space Labs 610
Defibrillator to be put into service with new Fire/Rescue
Pumper at Fire Station 2.
Background:
The City Council policy resolution on purchasing provides
that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment
or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to
purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for
consideration.
The Heart Aid defibrillator currently used was purchased
over five years ago and has become unreliable and
unrepairable. Hennepin County EMS has recommended that the
Heart Aid defibrillators be replaced for those reasons. A
Space Labs 610 defibrillator is currently in service on the
rescue truck at Fire Station 1. Having both trucks use the
same style defibrillator would keep the Firefighter's
training and protocol the same.
• Recommended Motion:
A
rove a
urchase
order to S
ace Labs Inc
for:
pp p p
-.
Unit
Oty. Model # Description Price Total
1 90526-06-18 610 Defibrillator with LCD $4450 $4450
Monitor and Manual Control
1 90530 250 Simulator Tester $ 325 $ 325
2 90531 Memory Modules $ 225 $ 450
1 010-0217-00 Lead Acid Battery $ 125 125
SUBTOTAL Does not include shipping, handling or tax $5350
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Current Heart Aid is unreliable and unrepairable.
2. Space Labs Inc. is the only source in the nation for
this item.
3. Adequate funds are in the Fire Truck Reserve Fund to
cover this purchase.
Alternative Recommendation:
To deny approval and try to seek donations to fund the
purchase.
? E-(
•
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The cost of the item is going to increase in approximately
60 days and the price quote is good for only 30 days.
The new Fire/Rescue pumper should be in service by March 1
and staff will be able to put the defibrillator in service
on that truck upon receipt.
Respectfu y submitted,
(A/
James Prosser
City 4nager
u
JDP:ds
qb
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No. 31
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Resolution authorizing execution of a contract with Hennepin
County for 80% reimbursement of 1994 recycling expenses.
Background:
Hennepin County has provided annual recycling funding to
municipalities for curbside collection of residential recyclables
for the last several years. Richfield has used the money to pay
residents a quarterly recycling credit on their utility bill.
Under terms of the Hennepin County contract, the City will
receive $1.75 per month per residence. Promotion and
administration costs approximately 220 per household per month.
That means residences will receive a credit of $1.53 per month
which amounts to $4.59 on a quarterly utility bill, same as 1993.
Recommended Motion:
Adopt the attached resolution authorizing execution of a contract
with Hennepin County for 80% reimbursement of 1994 recycling
expenses.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The funding contract for recycling contains those costs
. budgeted by the City for recycling in 1994.
2. The 1994 contract would be for the same amount per residence
as was provided in the 1993 contract for funding from
Hennepin County.
3. The City has consistently met and exceeded the residential
recycling goal.
4. Hennepin County is the only known outside funding source for
reimbursement of recycling program expenses.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council could choose not to enter into a Hennepin County contract
for reimbursement of recycling expenses; however, the City would
then be responsible for paying 100% of recycling program costs.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Approval at this time will allow the City to issue a recycling
credit to residents on their quarterly utility bill. Staff is
requesting approval at the January 24, 1994 Council meeting.
Respectfu)Lly submitted,
Jam s . Prosser
Cit anager
JDP:ds
qb-1
0 RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF MUNICIPAL GRANT APPLICATION
FOR 1994 HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City is required to provide recycling
opportunities and to achieve a 18% residential recycling goal in
1994; and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield desires to participate in the
residential recycling grant program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota:
1. That a municipal grant application be made for
participation in the 1994 Hennepin County Residential
Recycling Program.
2. That the City Manager of the City of Richfield is hereby
authorized and directed to execute and to file such
application with the Hennepin County Department of
Environmental Management.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
• this 24th day of January, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk
0
4L
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 30
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Setting date of public hearing for consideration of the issuance
of a new on-sale wine license for The Frenchman's, 1400 East 66th
Street.
Background:
An application for a new on-sale wine license for The Frenchman's
has been received by the City. City ordinance provides that the
City Council conduct a public hearing to consider all wine
license applications.
Recommended Motion:
1. A public hearing must be scheduled and held before a new
license may be considered.
2. The new process has been initiated.
3. Holding the public hearing on February 14, 1994 will provide
ample time to complete the licensing process.
Alternative Recommendation:
• 1. Schedule the hearing for another date. However, this may
delay the licensing process.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Action to schedule the public hearing on February 14, 1994 will
provide sufficient time for legal publication of the hearing.
Respect 1 submitted,
James rosser
City M ger
JDP:ds
0
q5
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 29
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Request for reappointment of representatives to the South Hennepin
Regional Planning Agency Regional Citizens Advisory Commission.
Background:
Camillo DeSantis, Chair of the Richfield Community Human Services
Planning Council (RCHSPC.), and John Boyle, RCHSPC member, were
appointed as representatives in 1991 and have served their first
term. They are now up for reappointment.
In the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency (SHeRPA) Bylaws,
Article V., Section 2, it states that the Regional Citizens
Advisory Commission shall consist of two representatives from each
party's Local Advisory Group, to be appointed by the City Council.
Terms are for two years and members may serve up to three terms.
Each City Council is directed to make appointments in January, with
terms commencing in February. Each voting Commission member shall
have one vote each.
Recommended Motion:
• Approve the reappointment of Camillo DeSantis and John Boyle as
Richfield representatives to the Regional Citizens Advisory
Commission of the South Hennepin Regional Planning Agency for a two
year term.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Both appointees have served one.term and have successfully
represented the citizens of Richfield.
2. Appointments of representatives to SHeRPA are necessary in
order to ensure the needs of the City of Richfield are
accounted for in planning for human services in South Hennepin.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Provide substitute appointments to the Regional Citizens
Advisory Commission.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Consideration of this item is scheduled for the January 24, 1994
City Council meeting.
ly submitted,
•
JDP:ds
Ja D. Prosser
Cit anaaer
q/q
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Council Letter No. 28
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Setting a date for the 1994 Local Board of Review.
Background:
Minnesota Statute 274.01 provides that the County Assessor shall
establish a date for Local Boards of Review each year, for the
purpose of reviewing the assessment of property within each
respective city in Hennepin County. The meetings are to be held
between March 1 and May 31 and must be preceded by at least 10
days published notice before the date of the first meeting. The
Board of Review must complete its work within 20 days of the
first local Board meeting each year, unless a longer period of
time is approved by the Commissioner of Revenue. However, the
Commissioner will not issue an extension past May 31.
The County Assessor has recommended Monday, May 2, 1994, as the
date of the 1994 Local Board of Review meeting for Richfield.
The meeting will be scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m. The City of
Richfield has typically held its Board of Review meeting the last
Monday in April or the first Monday in May.
Approximately a month prior to the Local Board of Review meeting,
the Administrative Services Director and staff of the Hennepin
County,Assessor's office assigned to Richfield will brief Council
Members on the Board of Review process and of typical cases that
may come before the Board.
Recommended Motion:
It is recommended that the City Council confirm the County
Assessor's selection of Monday, May 2, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. for the
1993 Board of Review meeting.
Basis for Recommendation:
.1. The County Assessor coordinates the scheduling of all Local
Boards of Review in Hennepin County. He has recommended
Monday, May 2, 1994.
2. This meeting date allows ample time for the City to conclude
its Board business.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. The City Council could select another date for the Local
Board of Review Hearing and submit the date to the County
Assessor.
is
qA-I
Discussion/Decision Mode:
JDP:ds
Hennepin County must make a schedule of
hearings to facilitate the County Board
that needed information has been compile
Board of Review meetings. Notification
be made as soon as possible, especially
requested.
r?
U
Local Board.of Review
hearings and to ensure
ad prior to the Local
to Hennepin County should
if an alternative day is
Respectfull submitted,
James D rosser
City Ma ger
0
E-
IA JAN 19 1994
L
r'lic:ailcir: of I
DATE: January 18, 1994
TO: Thomas Ferber, Richfield City Clerk
HENNEPIN
FROM: Donald.F. Monk, County Assessor
SUBJECT: 1994 Local Board of Review Dates
Monday , May 2, 1994
Day of the Week Date
Minnesota Law requires that I, asCounty Assessor, set the date for
your Local Board of Review meeting. After reviewing previous
meeting days and your suggestions of last year, the above date was
selected. I sincerely hope that it is agreeable with your council.
As there must be a.quorum, I would suggest that an informal review
of your members with a request that they mark their calendars would
be appropriate.
Please confirm the--.date set out or call Tom May at 348-3046 with
your alternative date by January 28, 1994, so that our printing
• order can be completed on time. We suggest starting times of 6:30,
7:00, or 7:30 p.m., *but will discuss it with.you if you wish a
different time.
Your early completion and return of the attached tear off strip
will be appreciated and we will send your official notice for
posting as required by law.
Please return to JoDee Nelson, A-2103 Government Center,
Minneapolis, MN 55487.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIRMATION
Municipality:
Date:
Time:
Place:
Confirmed by
For selecting meeting dates in future years, the following
• information will be helpful
a
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Council Letter No.27
Agenda January 24, 1994
Issue Statement:
Consideration of a resolution approving the Social Service Agency
Committee report and recommendations, and authorizing the City
Manager to execute agreement for service with those agencies
funded by the City.
Background:
In 1986, the City established a Social Service Agency Committee
to review requests of various agencies seeking funding
assistance. The Committee is comprised of members of the
Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council.
Grant applications totalling $19,290 were received. The amount
of funding available in the 1994 budget for these agencies is
$15,810.
The Committee interviewed the applicants on January 13, 1994 and
formulated their recommendations.
Recommended Motion:
Approve the resolution providing funding of certain social
service agencies in the following amounts:
• Senior Outreach Program (Senior Community Services) $ 6,000
VEAP Shared Transportation 3,510
Cornerstone Advocacy 3,000
Senior Linkage Line Network (Senior Resources, Inc.) 1,800
Share-A-Home (Lutheran Social Services) 1,500
TOTAL $15,810
Basis for Recommendation:
1. The Committee carefully considered the individual requests of
each agency and has addressed the community needs and merit
of each request. The Committee is sensitive to community
concerns and their recommendations should be followed.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Reject the recommendation of the Committee. The City Council
would then make their own determinations
•
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item has been placed in
January 24, 1994 City Council
will be present to respond to
the Presentation Section of the
agenda. Members of the Committee
any questions from the Council.
Res e t ully submitted,
James D. Prosser
City M ager
JDP:ds
Copy: Camillo DeSantis, RCHSPC Chair
C)-I
• RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A REVISION OF THE 1994
BUDGET FOR OTHER AGENCIES DIVISION
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 1994 budget document
on December 13, 1993, appropriating funds for personal services
and other expenses and capital outlays for each department of the
City for the year 1994; and ,
WHEREAS, the City Manager has requested revision of the 1994
budget appropriation in accordance with Charter provisions for
determining the specific allocation of $15,810 of unallocated
funds for the Legislative Department - Other Agencies Division of
the General Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Richfield as follows:
Senior Outreach Program (Senior Community Services) $ 6,000
VEAP Shared Transportation 3,510
Cornerstone Advocacy 3,000
Senior Linkage Line Network (Senior Resources, Inc.) 1,800
Share-A-Home (Lutheran Social Services) 1,500
TOTAL $15,810
• BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager be authorized
to execute contractual agreement with the above-named agencies
summarizing services to be provided to Richfield residents.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
24th day of January, 1994.
Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk
•
1993 1994 1994
GRANT REQUEST REC. GRANT
Senior Outreach Program
(Senior Community Services) $ 6,000 $ 7,490 $ 6,000
VEAP Shared Transportation 3,310 5,000 3,510
Cornerstone Advocacy 3,000 3,500 3,000
Senior Linkage Line Network
(Senior Resources, Inc.) 2,000 1,800 1,800
Share-A-Home
(Lutheran Social Services) 1,500 1,500 1,500
TOTAL $15,810 $19,290 $15,810
•
0
a-3
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Memorandum
L1
DATE: January 19, 1994
TO: James D. Prosser, City Manager
FROM: Camillo DeSanti??a?Chair
Richfield Community Human Service Planning Council
SUBJECT: 1994 City of Richfield Social Service Funds
On the evening of Thursday, January 13, 1994, members of the
Richfield Community Human Service Planning Council met to hear
presentations from applicant agencies and then determined its
recommendation to the City Council on the distribution of $15,810
available for social service funding.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Senior Community Services-Senior Outreach Program $ 6,000
2. VEAP-Transportation Program 3,510
3. Cornerstone-Support of all Programs except Intervention 3,000
4. Senior Resources-Senior Linkage Line Network 1,800
5. Lutheran Social Services-Senior Share-A-Home 1,500
Total Amount Available and Recommended: $15,810
RATIONALE AND INFORMATION
The following is some brief information and comments about the five
applicant agencies:
1. Senior Community Services
The grant of $6,000 would be used to support the Senior Outreach
Program to serve Richfield seniors. The purpose of this program is
to assist elderly to remain independent in their homes and in their
community as long as possible and practical. The program assesses
each situation, assists the senior and family to select needed and
appropriate services, offers counseling to the senior, family
members and other caregivers, monitors the plan of services on an
ongoing basis, and assigns community volunteers to serve as peer
counselors and friendly visitors especially for frail homebound
elderly. One hundred and sixty-five Richfield residents received
long term, intensive service during 1992. (Figures were not
available for 1993.) Seniors using the service tend to be over 75
year of age, have serious health problems, and low income. One cost
effective measure of this program is keeping seniors out of nursing
homes which cost about $35,000 per year.
• 2. VEAP
The grant of $3,510 will be used for the Transportation Program,
This program is focussed on providing transportation especially.for
the elderly, handicapped and low income who are not able to use
public transportation. Trips could be to the doctor, a hospital,
shopping, etc. Some information from the application states that
58% of riders are over 75 years of age, 84% are women and 32% are
Richfield residents. For the first six months of 1993, 360 total
clients were served, 29% were Richfield residents or 120 Richfield
residents. During this period, 711 trips were provided to Richfield
residents. The program has a handicapped equipped van and it uses
volunteer drivers who use their own cars.
3. Cornerstone
The grant of $3,000 will go to support all Cornerstone programs
except the Intervention Program. (The agency plans to obtain funds
for the Intervention Program from other sources.) Cornerstone's
purpose is "to provide advocacy and crises intervention to victims
of domestic abuse, to support victims and their children to overcome
the barriers they encounter in their struggle to live violence-free
lives, by providing a continuum of services that address the
immediate crises, the aftermath and the long-term needs of the
family." Some of the services are short-term safe housing,
individual support, support groups, legal advocacy, children's
program and families in transition program. Through November 30,
1993, 165 Richfield women, 4 Richfield men and 133 Richfield
children were served. An additional 105 women attended weekly
support groups.
• 4. Senior Resources, Inc.
The grant of $1,800 will be used to fund the Senior Linkage Line
Network, formerly the Senior Answer Line. The purpose of this
program is to provide information and referral service as closely
identified with local community as possible. The South Hennepin
site is located in the Community Service Department of the City of
Bloomington, serving Bloomington and Richfield currently. In 1994,
Edina and Eden Prairie plan to fund the program as well so the
Network will address information and referral needs of seniors in
the four communities. Due to data privacy laws, specific statistics
are not able to be provided. However, through November 1993, the
number of calls to the Bloomington site were 1,455. The estimate is
that 30% of the calls are from Richfield residents.
5. Lutheran Social Service of Minnesota
This grant of $1,500 will go to support the Share-A-Home Program.
This program "enable seniors and persons with disabilities to remain
in their own homes and avoid unnecessary institutionalization.
Live-in companions are placed in the homes of.older adults to
provide chore services, companionship, security and sometimes to
offset increased utility costs. Secondary benefits are low-cost
housing for the live-ins and relationships that narrow 'generation
gaps between young and old. Share-A-Home is expanding the program
to include single parent families. Six matches were made in 1993 in
Richfield. One Richfield live-in candidate was placed outside of
• Richfield. Currently six older Richfield residents are awaiting
placement and three live-in candidates are awaiting placement. The
role of the Share-A-Home program is to screen applicants, provide
suitable matches, and monitor the matches on an ongoing basis.
a5
PROCESS
? Applicant agencies were required to complete and return
applications by December 23, 1993.
? The Screening Committee was comprised of members of the Richfield
Community Human Service Planning Council. In attendance were:
Jane Butterfield
Camillo DeSantis
Jean Fox
Joan Helmberger
Nathan Nelson
Lorraine Schreyer
? The Screening Committee met with the applicant agencies on January
13, 1994.
The plan is for the social service fund recommendation to be made
to the Richfield City Council at its meeting of January 24, 1994.
CDS:ds
Copy: Diane Anastos
Jane Butterfield
Camillo DeSantis
Jean Fox
Joan Helmberger
• Nathan Nelson
Lorraine Schreyer
40