Loading...
06-22-92 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 22, 1992 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF (1) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 8, 1992 AND (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 15, 1992 PRESENTATIONS 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA 2. RECOGNITION OF ADAPTIVE RECREATION/LEARNING EXCHANGE (ABLE) ADVISORY COMMITTEE IN HONOR OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RECEIVING THE INNOVATIVE CITY AWARD FROM THE ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES • COUNCIL LETTER NO. 144 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 1992 AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATION IN DELIVERY OF EMPLOYMENT .INTERVENTION PROGRAM C.L.145 B.-CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PAINEWEBBER AS A DEPOSITORY FOR INVESTMENT OF CITY FUNDS IN 1992 C.L. 146 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT AND RETAIN THE FIRM OF HUGHES AND COSTELLO FOR PROVISION OF PROSECUTORIAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY C.L. 147 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR FAIRWAY AERATOR FOR USE AT RICH ACRES GOLF COURSE FROM CUSHMAN MOTOR COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,368 C.L. 148 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF_TEMPORARY ON-SALE NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE AND FEE WAIVER FOR MINNEAPOLIS-RICHFIELD AMERICAN LEGION POST 435 FOR JULY 4, 1992 C.L. 149 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF TEMPORARY ON-SALE NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE AND FEE WAIVER FOR FRED BABCOCK V.F.W. POST 5555 FOR JULY 3, 1992 C.L. 150 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 6305 WENTWORTH AVENUE, 3 CATS C.L. 151 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 7232 11TH AVENUE, 4 DOGS C.L. 152 I. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 7420 ALDRICH AVENUE, 3 DOGS C.L. 153 PUBLIC HEARING 5. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE, 6732 11TH AVENUE, 4 DOGS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 154 • ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS 6. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF CITY COMMENTS ON 1494 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) COUNCIL LETTER NO. 155 AIRPORT BUSINESS 7. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 8. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 9. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 10. CLAIMS AND PAYROLLS ADJOURNMENT 49 Issue Statement: Approval of City Statement (DEIS). Background The City Council Impact Statement Traffic Advisory CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 155 Agenda June 22, 1992 comments on 1494 Draft Environmental Impact has previously reviewed the Draft Environmental for 1494. A recommendation from the City's Committee includes: ? Support for the addition of two lanes in each.direction with one of those lanes designated as an HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lane. ? Support for the Ring Road Concept for the design of the I494/I35W Interchange. An open house and public information session regarding the 1494 DEIS was hosted by the Ad Hoc Committee on May 20. On June 10, 1992 the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) conducted a public hearing at the Edina Community Center. Only a few people have spoken at these public meetings on the proposal. Most people have been in favor of expanding 1494. Some businesses are concerned with changes in access. Several citizens want improved bikeways and pedestrians trails in the corridor. The City of Richfield has until June 26 to submit its comments on the DEIS. Recommended Motion: Approve the City's position regarding the 1494 DEIS as described in the attached letter. Basis for Recommendation: The position described in the proposed letter is based on Council direction given to staff throughout preparation of the I494 EIS. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: A decision must be made at the June 22, 1992, City Council meeting for submission to MnDOT by the June 26, 1992 deadline for comments. Respectfully submitted, Jam s Prosser Cit anager JDP:ds Attachment 0 date Mr. Craig Robinson I-494 Corridor Manager Minnesota Department of Transportation Metro District - West 2055 North Lilac Drive Golden Valley, MN 55422 Subject: State Project 2785-261 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for I-494 in Hennepin and Dakota Counties From: I-394 in Minnetonka To: Minnesota River Dear Craig: Introduction • The City of Richfield supports the Minnesota Department of Transportation's proposed action to improve I-494. (0-/ The project's goals, as summarized in the draft EIS, are: improve safety; increase person-carrying capacity of I-494; improve roadway condition; maintain or improve travel times and mainline traffic operations on I-494; maintain reasonably suitable and convenient access for existing development along I-494; minimize the amount of right of way needed for I-494; eliminate conditions that lead to ponding at low points on the I-494 mainline or ramps except for rare events; and, minimize impacts to natural environment. The City of Richfield supports the above project goals and believes that all decisions regarding alternatives and design must be measured by the extent to which the project goals are met. The City of Richfield recognized early on that expansion of I-494 was both necessary and potentially damaging to Richfield. We, therefore, engaged in a proactive planning process to view expansion of I-494 as an opportunity for Richfield. The basic principals which served.as our guide during this process included the following: ?lb .? The residential character of our community is extremely important and we must protect that environment. co). Craig Robinson • date Page 2 ? Retention of the commercial area along I-494 is very important to us. ? The construction of a parallel minor arterial was important to improve safety on I-494 and relieve I-494 from handling short and medium length trips. ? The improvements to I-494 should be designed so that the roadway will not be obsolete by the time it is completed. Rather, the design should have the flexibility to meet forecasted demand for the next generation. ? The final design selected for I-494 should have a strong and flexible transit component and incorporate travel demand management methods. Richfield's Position on I-494 Expansion The City opposes the No Build alternative as inadequate to address the transportation needs in the I-494 Corridor for the next twenty years. Richfield supports the Alternative 2A- Add Two Lanes in Each Direction With One of Those Lanes Designated as an HOV Lane for the reconstruction of the mainlines, and the sub-alternative- Base Interchange Design (Ring Road) for the reconstruction of the I-35W/I-494 interchange. The Add Two Lanes in Each Direction With One of Those Lanes Designated as an HOV Lane is the Superior Alternative Based on the recommendations of our Citizens' Traffic Advisory Committee, residents and institutions within our City, we strongly recommend that the Minnesota Department of Transportation choose Alternative 2A- Add Two Lanes in Each Direction With One of Those Lanes Designated as an HOV Lane. This option is shown to move the most people, cause the least amount of traffic to be diverted to local streets, is the safest, and will cause less pollution to our cities. It is clear that an effort must be made to decrease the number of people riding one per car in peak traffic times. Building HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) Lanes provides the incentive needed to encourage people to carpool. This approach to transit recognizes that the Twin Cities area has not embraced high density residential development nor does it maintain a single focus employment center. -3 Craig Robinson date Page 3 The construction of HOV Lanes on I-494 coupled with those proposed for I-35W and those already in operation on I-394 will all work together to enhance buses, vanpools and carpools as attractive alternatives to the single occupant automobile. Richfield favors the.addition of two lanes in both directions in order to meet the forecasted travel demand in the draft EIS. We believe the.need for an adequately sized facility far outweighs the extra cost of building two instead of only one lane in each direction. The draft EIS also shows that the amount of right of way needed for the second lane is only slightly more than the land needed to build one additional lane-in each direction. It is our belief that it would be less disruptive to the community to acquire now all of the land needed for the construction of the Add 2 Lanes option. We firmly believe that both the HOV lane and one additional general purpose lane in each direction should be built now to relieve the congestion that occurs at numerous locations along the entire length of I-494. Favor Base Interchange Design (Ring Road) at I-35W/I-494. • The proposed Ring Road appears to be superior to the overlapping Diamonds sub-alternative for the 135W/I494 interchange. Plans for the Ring Road design offer certain advantages to the City of Richfield. They are: -Provides good access to local streets; -Provides local access across freeways between Richfield and Bloomington that currently isn't available; -Limits right of way needed from Donaldson Park; -Requires less right of way acquisition; and, -Is less costly than the Overlapping Diamonds subalternative. However, The City of Richfield is still concerned that ramp entrances provide adequate storage space so that metering of entrance ramps does not cause severe back ups of traffic that result in blocking of local streets. If ramp entrances can not provide adequate storage space, grade separated frontage roads should be provided so local streets are not obstructed by vehicles waiting to enter the freeways. ? 0 (a -y • Craig Robinson date Page 4 Water Resources We are pleased that the draft EIS has identified a proposed gravity outlet from Wood Lake to the improved I-494 trunk storm sewer as part of the improvements proposed for I-494. This outlet has the potential for considerable cost savings to correct storm drainage problems resulting from the existing and proposed I-35W. Closure of 12th Avenue and Nicollet Avenue Interchanges Richfield recognizes the importance of closing the interchanges at 12th Avenue and Nicollet Avenue to improve safety on I-494 by eliminating the excessive weaving that occurs from entrances and exits located too close to each other. However, we want it to be clearly understood that all of the improvements on 77th Street including the connection to 24th Avenue and the new Portland Avenue interchange must be completed before Richfield will accept the closure of the two interchanges. This position is based on our concern that property owners along the north frontage road are provided adequate access to I-494 throughout construction of the proposed I-494 improvements. is Right of Way Needs on Local Streets A review of Figures 5.1-5.12 of the draft EIS did not clearly show the additional right of way needed to widen local cross streets at interchanges to assure adequate traffic capacity on these local streets. In particular, we are concerned with the additional right of way needed at Portland, Lyndale and Penn Avenues. Bike/Pedestrian Trails With regard to bikeways and pedestrian trails, Richfield has adopted a Master Park Plan that supports the use of surplus land for bike/pedestrian trails and the provision of pedestrian and bikeway crossings of freeways. In our review of the draft EIS, however, we found the discussion of mitigation for these facilities to be vague. We recommend that the improvements to I- 494 include additional bikeways and pedestrian crossings over the freeway consistent with our Master Park Plan. We believe crossings are needed at the SOO Line to connect Richfield and Bloomington to the Regional Park System, at 12th Avenue, Nicollet Avenue, Knox Avenue and Xerxes Avenue. 10-5 • Craig Robinson date Page 5 Noise Walls and Landscapin The City supports the use of noise walls and landscaping to ensure compatibility of the freeway with Richfield's residential neighborhoods. The design of these special features should be done with the involvement of the affected neighborhoods. Conclusion In conclusion, the City of Richfield endorses the findings of the I-494 draft EIS. The analysis demonstrates that the Alternative 2A- Add Two Lanes in Each Direction With One of Those Lanes Designated as an HOV Lane for the reconstruction of the mainlines best meets the project's goals. Also, the sub-alternative- Base Interchange Design (Ring Road) for the reconstruction of the I- 35W/I-494 interchange provides greater benefits at lower cost than the other design option for this critical interchange. Sincerely, • Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ? 0 5 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 154 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Public hearing for consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license for Sharon Trego, 6732 11th Avenue. Background: On May 14 , 1992, Sharon Trego submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns four dogs (a Sheep Dog, American Eskimo, Shelty and Welch Corgie). Ms. Trego's application had all contiguous property owners' signatures on it with the exception of the resident living next door at 6738 11th Avenue. On May 15, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. The Community Service Officer did note that one of the abutting property owners had not signed the petition. Staff has met with the neighbor who does not want to sign the petition. That resident has concerns about barking dogs in is general, not necessarily specific to the Trego residence, although that is part of the problem. They have been referred to West Suburban Mediation Center as it appears this is a long standing dispute between two neighbors. Although this application is for four dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license not be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Trego has not been able to satisfy one neighbor 2. Staff has been contacted by one neighbor with concerns regarding the barking dogs, even though these concerns are not entirely due to the Tregos. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to approve Ms. Trego's residential kennel license. • Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to deny the application for a residential kennel license for Sharon Trego, 6732 11th Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Ci JDP:ds 0 lly submitted, . Prosser LJ yZ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 153 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license for Sandra Pynn, 7420 Aldrich Avenue. Background: On May 28, 1992, Sandra Pynn submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns three dogs. Ms. Pynn's application had all contiguous property owners' signatures on it. On June 15, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for three dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was-approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Pynn has been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny Ms. Pynn's residential kennel license. This would mean that she would have to reduce the number of dogs she has from three to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for Sandra Pynn, 7420 Aldrich Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City iager JDP:ds qp CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 152 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license for Carolyn Kretchmer, 7232 11th Avenue. Background: On May 29,•1992, Carolyn Kretchmer submitted an application for a residential kennel license. She owns four dogs. Ms. Kretchmer's application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it. On June 6, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for four dogs, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two dogs does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Ms. Kretchmer has been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny Ms. Kretchmer's residential kennel license. This would mean that she would have to reduce the number of dogs she has from four to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for Carolyn Kretchmer, 7232 11th Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City M nager JDP:ds ? 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.151 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Consideration of an application for renewal of a residential kennel license for David Delzer, 6305 Wentworth Avenue. Background: On May 28,•1992, David Delzer submitted an application for a residential kennel license. He owns three cats. Mr. Delzer's application had all contiguous property owner's signatures on it. On June 6, 1992, an inspection of the property was conducted by a Community Service Officer. There were no apparent problems found at that time. Although this application is for three cats, it does not exceed the maximum number of six animals that was approved by the Council as policy on July 22, 1991. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the application for a residential kennel license be approved. Basis for Recommendation: • 1. It is up to the animal owner to prove that the keeping of more than two cats does not have an adverse effect on the neighborhood. Mr. Delzer has been able to do this. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny Mr. Delzer's residential kennel license. This would mean that he would have to reduce the number of cats he has from three to two. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a residential kennel license for David Delzer, 6305 Wentworth Avenue, is presented for Council consideration at this time. Respe fully submitted, Jame f Prosser City ag er JDP:ds yF CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.150 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Request by Fred Babcock V.F.W. Post 5555 for a temporary on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for July 3, 1992. Background: On June 5, 1992, Fred Babcock V.F.W. Post 5555 submitted a request for a temporary license to serve non-intoxicating malt liquor (3.2 beer) on the evening of July 3. They are requesting that any fee be waived. This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has been organized by the Fourth of July Committee. Their plans are to have an open house and community dance outside on their property and they would like to serve refreshments, including beer. Recommended Motion: Approve a fee waived, temporary license for July 3, 1992 with the stipulations that the sale of 3.2 beer cease no later than midnight, and that the applicant submit proof of liquor liability insurance coverage for the outside property on which the beer will be served and consumed. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a temporary on-sale beer license. 2. The applicant has supplied the additional liquor liability insurance coverage. 3. The City has previously issued temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the council has previously granted temporary on- sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the temporary non-intoxicating malt liquor license has been placed on the consent calendar for June 22, 1992. ly submitted, • James Y. Prosser City ft?nager JDP:ds q Co • ?J I• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 149 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Request by Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 for a temporary on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license for July 4, 1992. Background: On June 11, 1992, the Minneapolis-Richfield American Legion Post 435 submitted a request for a temporary license to serve non- intoxicating malt liquor (3.2 beer) on July 4 from 1 p.m. to 12 midnight. They are requesting that any fee be waived. This request is in conjunction with the Richfield Fourth of July Celebration and has been organized by the Fourth of July Committee. Recommended Motion: Approve a fee waived, temporary license for July 4,.1992 with the stipulations that the sale of 3.2 beer cease no later than midnight, and that the applicant submit proof of liquor liability insurance coverage for the outside property on which the beer will be served and consumed. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the City codes pertaining to a temporary on-sale beer license. 2. The applicant has supplied additional liquor liability insurance coverage. 3. The City has previously issued temporary on-sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide to deny the request. The Public Safety Department has not found any basis for a denial. In addition, the Council has previously granted temporary on- sale beer licenses in conjunction with the Fourth of July Celebration. Discussion/Decision Mode: The request for the temporary license has been placed on the 1992. non-intoxicating malt liquor consent calendar for June 22, Respe lly submitted, James Prosser City nager JDP:ds qb • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.148 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 for a fairway aerator for use at the Rich Acres Golf Course. 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. Due to the heavy annual play at Rich Acres and the results thereof, the USGA Turf Advisory representative recommended the purchase of a fairway aerator that can also be used on tees. In the past, Rich Acres has relied on the Toro Company to aerate with experimental equipment. That equipment has gone into production and is no longer available for test use on the City's course. The aerator will be used on fairways, roughs, the driving range tee, and the other golf course tees. On June 10, 1992 bids were opened in accordance with legal requirements. Two bids were received: Cushman Motor Company - $17,368 MTI Distributing - $20,890 ? is Recommended Motion: Approve the-bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for purchase of the fairway aerator for the Rich Acres Golf Course in the amount of $17,368 to Cushman Motor Company. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Rich Acres is in need of a fairway aerator to maintain conditions on its courses due to heavy play. 2. The USGA Turf Advisory Study recommended purchase of such a unit. 3. Cushman Motor Company submitted the lowest bid. 4. There are sufficient funds available in the golf course enterprise fund to cover this purchase. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could choose to continue with the existing conditions. 2. The Council could select another supplier. q b-I 3. The Council could direct staff to look for alternatives, although staff believes this is the best choice. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the June 22, 1992 regular City Council meeting. Staff is asking for approval at this time in order to make a timely purchase so that this piece of equipment can be used this season. ly submitted, Jame City JDP:ds Attachment u Prosser 0 qb-z CITY OF RICHFIELD, M • Bid 'Opening June 9, 1992 10:30 A.M. Fairway Aerator Bid No. 92-5 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas.P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for fairway aerator, Bid No. 92-5, as advertised in the official newspaper on May 27, 1992. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steve Devich, Administrative Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative Darrel Harman, Golf Course Manager The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR ; BID ; TOTAL ; SECURITY MTI Distributing Co. Plymouth ; 5% Bid Bond ; $20,890.00 ; Cushman Motor Company Mpls. ; 5% Cashiers ; $17,368.00 ; Check The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 22, 1992 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk L/C CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 147 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Authorization for the City Manager to enter into an agreement and retain the firm of Hughes and Costello for the provision of prosecutorial services for the City. Background: In the fall of 1988, at the direction of the Council, staff conducted an analysis of legal services provided to the City. In the analysis, a number of law firms were given the opportunity to provide proposals and make presentations. The conclusion was staff recommendation and Council approval of the retention of the then firm of LeFevere, Lefler with John Dean as principal attorney for general corporate representation and Peterson, Bell, Converse and Jensen with Martin Costello as principal prosecutor for prosecution services. . Staff was recently ai resignation with the Jensen and effective • Hughes and Costello. prosecution with Mr. prosecutors. 3vised the Mr. Costello has tendered his firm of Peterson, Bell, Converse and July 1, 1992, has formed a new firm of The new firm will be specializing in Costello and Mr. Hughes as experienced Mr. Costello has submitted a proposal to the City of Richfield to continue as prosecutor with his new firm in the amount of not to exceed $97,500 per year. This is approximately $8,000 per year less than the current agreement with Peterson, Bell, Converse and Jensen. Recommended Motion: Council approval of the retention of Hughes and Costello as prosecution attorneys for the City of Richfield with Martin Costello as principal attorney. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Mr. Costello has an excellent reputation as a prosecutor and has provided effective, experienced prosecution services to the City. 2. In addition, his new firm has experienced prosecutors which will provide back-up for him in his absence. Alternative Recommendation: Council could direct staff to open the process of reviewing other firms. This is a time consuming process which could • leave the City without a prosecutor for a period of time. 4 c-1 • Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the June 22, 1992 City Council agenda with staff recommending approval authorizing the City Manager to enter into a retainer agreement with Hughes and Costello for prosecution services commencing on July 1, 1992. Respe f ly submitted, Jame Prosser City ager JDP:ds Attachment is U yc-2 • MUNICIPAL PROSECUTION PROPOSAL for THE CITY OF RICHFIELD Richfield City Hall 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, Minnesota 55423 CJ SUBMITTED BY THE LAW FIRM OF HUGHES & COSTELLO ST. PAUL OFFICE MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE 1230 Landmark Towers Suite 500 345 St. Peter Street 701-4th Avenue South St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 qC-3 INTRODUCTION This is Hughes & Costello's proposal for the municipal prosecution services for the City of Richfield, Minnesota. To serve the needs of the municipal clients, the law firm has developed a group of experienced prosecuting attorneys, legal assistants and other people. A brief r6sum6 for each of these people is given below. Chief Prosecutor MARTIN J. COSTELLO, has nearly eighteen years prosecution experience, comprising over fifty percent of his time. He was born in St. Paul, Minnesota on March 14, 1947. Education: College of St. Thomas (B.A., cum laude, 1969); University of Minnesota (J.D., cum laude, 1974); University of Wisconsin-Madison (M.A., 1982); and University of Minnesota (Ph.D., 1987). Admitted to bar: Minnesota (1974); U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota and U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit (1978); U.S. Supreme Court (1981). Author: Minnesota Misdemeanors and Moving Traffic Violations, Butterworth Legal Publishing Co., St. Paul, Minnesota (1990). Teaching: Instructor, Criminal Law and Procedure, William Mitchell College of Law (1975 - present); Adjunct Professor, Criminal Law and Procedure, University of Minnesota Law School (1974 - present). Member: Ramsey County, Minnesota State and American Bar Associations; Minnesota/American Trial Lawyers Association. Lead Prosecutor • THOMAS R. HUGHES, has nearly twenty years prosecution experience, comprising over fifty percent of his time. He was born in St. Paul, Minnesota on October 25, 1942. Education: University of Minnesota (B.S., 1968); University of Minnesota (J.D., cum laude, 1972). Admitted to bar: Minnesota and U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota (1972); U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit (1972). Chief prosecutor for the City of St. Paul, 1975-78; Prosecuting Attorney for the City of New Brighton, 1978-present. Teaching: Adjunct Instructor, Criminal Law, William Mitchell of Law (1986 to Present); Instructor, Ramsey County Sheriff s Training Courses (1972 to Present). Member: Ramsey County, Minnesota State and American Bar Associations; and Minnesota Trial Lawyers Association. Assistant Prosecutor JOHN G. DILLON, has nearly five years of prosecution experience, comprising over fifty percent of his time. He was born in Minneapolis, Minnesota on September 25, 1957. Education: University of Minnesota (B.A., 1984); and William Mitchell College of Law (J.D., cum laude, 1988). Admitted to bar: Minnesota (1988); U.S. District Court and Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (1989). Teaching: Adjunct Instructor, Criminal Law, William Mitchell college of Law (1988-1992). Member: Minnesota State Bar Association; Ramsey County Bar Association. 2 y c-q Legal Assistant KM TUCKNER has been employed in prosecution as a legal assistant for the past six years, and works exclusively in municipal prosecution. Education: High School; Rasmussen Business College; St. Paul TVI Municipal Prosecution Services The following is a summary of the prosecution work Hughes & Costello would do as Richfield city prosecutors: 1. Advising Police Agencies: The police, code enforcement officers and others submit investigatory reports and other necessary materials to the prosecutor for review. Our firm has an attorney available for consultations with police agencies throughout the work week, evenings and weekends. In this way, the defendants can be charged within the thirty-six hours prescribed by the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure. We will advise the police and other city departments on the appropriate action or follow up action to be taken in all cases submitted. 2. Ordinance Enforcement: A successful ordinance violation prosecution program includes two elements: (1) vigorous prosecution of ordinance violations, and; (2) keeping the ordinances current with other legal developments. We will work closely with the various City departments to enforce all City ordinances. Additionally, we will advise the Richfield City Council as requested or required on all ordinance law developments and changes. 3. Peace Officer Training: We will inform, advise and train the Richfield Police and other city departments on legislative changes, case law developments, and courtroom procedures, as • scheduled by the appropriate department head. In-house legal seminars would include an annual law up-date on domestic violence, DWI, juvenile law, obscenity/pornography and similar topics. 4. Charging: All complaints issue within seven (7) days of submission, or less if needed. We will draft complaints for statutory and ordinance violations (petty misdemeanor, misdemeanor, and gross misdemeanor). All gross misdemeanor cases (aggravated DWI, gross misdemeanor DWI, gross misdemeanor assault, etc.) must start with a complaint drafted by the prosecutor. Misdemeanor and petty misdemeanor violations are sometimes initiated by the drafting of a complaint and sometimes initiated by citations issued by police agencies; thereafter, the prosecution must amend, recharge or reinitiate charges by filing a complaint. If probable cause exists, we will draft appropriate documents and arrange to have the complaint signed before a judge of the Hennepin County District Court. Further arrangements are then made to have the defendant appear in response to appropriate process. 5. Calendar Appearances: The City should be competently represented at every stage of the criminal process, and the prosecutor must be prepared. Arraignments for the City of Richfield are on Tuesday and Friday mornings in Hennepin County District Court, Southdale. We will prepare, assemble and review all case files; draft any appropriate documents (motions, orders, etc.); appear for and represent the City of Richfield at the arraignments; take necessary follow-up action (filing amended complaints, obtaining further records or documentation, directing additional investigation, etc.). The prosecuting attorney continues to handle any matter for which a further appearance is scheduled pursuant to the defendant's no guilty plea or continued arraignment. Additional calendar appearances include any continued arraignments, pretrial diversion, sentencing, post-conviction relief, etc. • 6. Court Trials: Seemingly minor cases-but nonetheless important are often resolved by non jury trials. Trials for petty misdemeanors (and some misdemeanors) are in Hennepin County District Court, Southdale on Tuesday and Fridays. We will represent the City by 3 4 c_,T assembling a case file, notifying and/or subpoenaing all necessary witnesses, obtaining all necessary documentation (certified driving records, prior conviction records, insurance records, etc.), meeting with and interviewing witnesses, presenting the City's case and . attending any subsequent proceedings (sentencing, probation revocation, etc.). Typical court trial cases include minor traffic violations (speeding, stop signs, lane use, etc.) and minor criminal matters (possession of a small amount of marijuana, paraphernalia, etc.). 7. Pretrial Conferences and Omnibus Hearings: In misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor cases, pretrial conferences and/or omnibus hearings are held in Hennepin County District Court, Southdale, on Tuesday and Fridays. We will represent the City of Richfield by preparing a case file, obtaining all necessary documentation (certified driving records, certified conviction records, etc.), notifying and/or subpoenaing any necessary witnesses, contacting victims pursuant to the Crime Victims' Rights Act (to solicit input on dispositions, restitution, etc.), making and responding to pretrial motions, and appearing for the city at the pretrial/omnibus hearings. Typical gross misdemeanor cases set for an omnibus hearing include aggravated driving while under the influence of alcohol, fleeing a police officer, some forms of assault, theft, bad checks, forgery and criminal damage to property. 8. Jury Trials: More serious cases-misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors-are tried to six person juries. Jury trials are in Hennepin County District Court, Southdale, every other Tuesday and Friday. Cases set for jury trials are those that do not result in a guilty plea at the pretrial conference and/or omnibus hearing. Normally jury trials are set for a "day certain"; that is, cases are scheduled for trial on specific days throughout the week. The prosecuting attorney will be available throughout the week should the case be called for trial. We will prepare the case file, notify and/or subpoena necessary witnesses, obtain all necessary documents, make a response to pretrial motions and present Richfield's case at jury trials. 9. Sentencings: Normally sentencings occur at the time of the guilty finding, verdict, or plea (arraignment, pretrial conference, omnibus hearing); however, in many cases (assault, gross misdemeanor violations, etc.), the court conducts a presentence investigation and has sentencing occur at a latter date. We will represent the City at the sentencing, present information pursuant to the Crime Victims' Rights Act, supply the court with all necessary information (prior record, restitution claims, etc.) and argue Richfield's case at sentencing. 10. Appeals: Appeals from district court are to the Minnesota Court of Appeals and then a discretionary appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Appeals are rarely taken by the defense in non-felony matters and are almost never pursued by the prosecution. Such appeals are not covered by the retainer proposal, and would only be initiated with the express permission of the Chief of Police and/or the City Manager. FEES Hughes & Costello will perform the above described prosecution services to the City of Richfield on the following basis. We would provide all prosecution services exclusive of appeals for sixty-five ($65.00) per hour with a limitation or "cap" on total annual fees of $97,500.00 per year. The above legal services include all back-up resources necessary for proper discharge of the prosecution responsibilities. Back-up includes secretarial, office supplies, travel, and the like. The only additional charges are certain out-of-pocket expenses such as filing fees, transcript fees, • photocopying, etc., for documents and materials required to be served and/or filed by the court. such expenses are posted to the monthly retainer fee statement on a cost item basis. 4 LI C- 40 It would be a privilege for Hughes & Costello to serve as prosecuting attorneys for the City of Richfield , and we look forward to the opportunity to be of service to the City. Respectfully submitted, tIUG?ES & COSTELLO /,<,,, / M'q r+; V-' M in J. Costello 0 n U 5 48 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA • Council Letter No. 146 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement Council approval of a resolution designating PaineWebber as a depository for the investment of City funds in 1992. Background At the January 13, 1992 City Council meeting, Resolution No. 7838, A Resolution Designating Certain Financial Institutions/ Brokerage Firms as Depositories for the investment of City Funds in 1992, was approved. City staff would like to add PaineWebber as a designated depository for 1992. As of May 1992, the spread between short-term and long-term interest rates is nearly 4%, compared to a spread of approximately 1% in the 19801s. Short-term rates have fallen from approximately 7.3% in September 1990 to 3.5% in 1992. This steep yield curve has prompted City financial managers to take a more active approach to managing their investment portfolios. PaineWebber has a very strong U.S.'government securities dealership and is a member of the Government Finance Officers Association. The firm trades all types of U.S. Government and U.S. Government Agency securities. In addition, PaineWebber can • aid the City in developing safe investment strategies to increase the City's total yield on investments. As a result, City staff desires to designate PaineWebber as a depository of City funds in 1992. Attached to this letter is a resolution which designates Paine Webber as a depository for the investment of City funds in 1992. This resolution has been prepared in accordance with the City Charter. Recommended Motion Adopt the attached resolution designating Paine Webber as a depository of the City. Basis of Recommendation 1. The City is required by Minnesota Statutes 475.66 and 118.005 to designate as a depository of funds, insured banks or thrift institiutuions as defined in Section 518.01, Subdivision 3, Minnesota State Statutes. 2. PaineWebber is one of the largest full-service, independent securities firms in the nation. They are a primary dealer, which from time to time enables the City of obtain a slightly lower price and higher yield than from other institutions. 3. PaineWebber has a very strong U.S. Government Securities . dealership. q,6-1 • 4. PaineWebber can assist the City in developing safe investment strategies to increase total investment yield. Alternative Recommendation 1. Do'not approve the resolution. Discussion/Decision Mode Action on this matter is desirable on June 22, 1992 so that the city may invest a portion of the funds received for the July 1992 tax settlement through PaineWebber. Respectfully submitted, City JDP:ds 0 . Prosser I• q6-2 • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A CERTAIN INSTITUTION AS DEPOSITORY FOR THE INVESTMENT OF CITY FUNDS IN 1992 WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has money which is available for investment; and WHEREAS, different financial institutions offer different rates of return on investments; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield shall purchase U.S. Treasury Bills, U.S. Treasury Notes, and U.S. Government Agency Securities in the manner required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.66 and 118.005 from the institution offering the highest rate to the City, providing greater flexibility in the City's investment program, and maximizing interest income thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that it is in the best interests of the proper management of City funds that certain financial institutions/brokerage firms be designated as official depositories for 1992. 2. That PaineWebber be added as a designated depository for municipal funds. 3. The treasurer is hereby authorized to deposit City funds in the above institution herein designated. Such deposits may be made and withdrawn from time to time by the Treasurer as his/her best judgment and the interest of the City dictates. 4. The investment of funds and the reporting thereof pursuant to this resolution shall be conducted in accordance with established policies of the City regarding the investment of City funds. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 22nd day of June, 1992. Martin J. Kirsch ATTEST: Mayor is Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk • • LJ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA yA Council Letter No. 145 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Approval of the 1992 agreement with Hennepin County for participation in the delivery of an employment intervention program. Background: The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners has passed a resolution making funds available for creating employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged persons in employment intervention programs. The County has allocated $15,000 and authorized the City of Richfield to expend those funds for an employment and training program. The City has been identified to furnish employment and training services to fulfill the program's requirements through the City's Youth Employment Services Division. The City has already identified a number of seasonal positions for which theme is no budgeted funding. The City's Youth Employment Services Division will seek applicants from community-based organizations, including minority organizations, and will make every effort to employ the most in need in those positions. Recommended Motion: Authorize the execution of the attached agreement with Hennepin County for the delivery of an employment intervention program. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The employment intervention program provides a supplement to the budgeted work-force. 2. The program provides a resource for the City's seasonal projects. 3. The only costs to the City are keeping administrative records. The salaries for the seasonal positions are reimbursed by Hennepin County, up to $15,000. Alternative Recommendation: Do not approve the execution of this agreement, thus forfeiting the allocated funds. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is placed on the June 22, 1992 agenda for consideration in order for interviews and hires to take place for the remainder of the calendar year. Respe ul submitted, James 0 Prosser City Manager JDP:ds qA-1 Hennepin County Agreement No. A08602 • AGREEMENT FOR THE DELIVERY OF EMPLOYMENT INTERVENTION PROGRAM This Agreement made and entered into by and between the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", through the Hennepin County Department of Training and Employment Assistance, First Level South Government Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, hereinafter referred to as the "DEPARTMENT and the CITY OF RICHFIELD a municipal corporation, through its Employment and Training Division, hereinafter referred to as "CITY". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners has, by Resolution, made funds available for the creation of employment opportunities for economically disadvantaged persons in employment intervention programs; and WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR is a public and/or non-profit and/or governmental organization; and WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR is qualified to furnish employment and training services, and emergency employment services; and WHEREAS, the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT is desirous of.entering into an agreement with the CONTRACTOR for the provision of said services; NOW; THEREFORE, In consideration of the mutual undertakings hereinafter set Vorth, the COUNTY through the DEPARTMENT and the CITY agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement The CITY is hereby authorized to operate and administer an employment intervention program for eligible persons from June 2. 1992 through December 31. 1992. 2. Program Resoon.sibilities-Services to be Provided The CONTRACTOR agrees to operate and administer, and the COUNTY through the DEPARTMENT agrees to fund an employment intervention program to eligible persons. The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such services in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, all applicable Federal, State and Local Rules and Regulations, policy statements and other written directives promulgated by the COUNTY through the DEPARTMENT governing the deliverance of the program. The CONTRACTOR further agrees to operate an employment, training and neighborhood improvement program in accordance with the following work statement as described in Attachment 1. • 1 y -2 3. Financial Provisions The CITY is hereby authorized to expend funds for an Employment and Training Program in accordance with the following: a. Available Funds: The total estimated amount allocated for this Agreement shall not exceed $15,000.00 b. Reimbursement: The COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT, shall reimburse the CITY for the CITY's employment and training program upon receipt of a monthly itemized invoice from the CITY specifying the costs incurred by the CITY's program during the previous month. Such monthly itemized invoices shall be due and payable by the COUNTY through the'DEPARTMENT, to the.CITY at intervals specified on the invoice, provided however, that the COUNTY through the DEPARTMENT, shall not reimburse the CITY for any costs incurred by the CITY which are not in accordance with the CITY's Program Budget attached hereto as Exhibit A, Federal and State regulations and COUNTY through the DEPARTMENT policies. CITY shall not be reimbursed for costs incurred if reports are not submitted in accordance with terms of this Agreement. 4. Indeoen_dent Contractor. CITY-COUNTY The following provisions shall apply to the CITY as well as the COUNTY. The parties shall acquire all immunities and liabilities as stated • therein. Nothing is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between the parties hereto or as constituting either party as the agent, representative, or employee of the other for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. The CITY and the COUNTY each are to be and shall be considered independent contractors with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Each of the parties represents that it has or will secure at its own expense all personnel required 'in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of each of the parties or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by either of the parties under this Agreement shall have of contractual relationship with the COUNTY if they are employed by the CITY, and with the CITY if they are employed by the COUNTY, and shall not be considered employees of the COUNTY if they are employed by the CITY, and employees of the CITY if they are employed by the COUNTY. Any and all claims that may or might arise under the Unemployment Compensation Act or the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel, arising out of employment or alleged employment by the CITY or. the COUNTY, including,. without limitation, claims of discrimination against the CITY or COUNTY, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of the CITY if it pertains to COUNTY employees, or the COUNTY if it pertains to CITY employees. Such personnel while working • for the CITY under this Agreement shall neither require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the 2 4A-3 COUNTY, and while working for the COUNTY under this Agreement shall not acquire any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the CITY, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Insurance, disability, severance pay and PERA. 5. Liability and Indemnification a. The CITY does hereby agree that it will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the COUNTY against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the COUNTY may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay as a result of claims, lawsuits, judgments, arising out of the fai1ure.of the CITY to perform any and all obligations required under this Agreement. The CITY's obligation to indemnify and hold the COUNTY harmless shall be subject to the limitations of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1988, Sections 466.02 and 466.04. b. The. COUNTY does hereby agree that it will defend,. indemnify, and hold harmless the CITY against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses which the CITY may hereafter sustain, incur, or be required to pay as a result of claims, lawsuits, judgments, arising out of the failure of the COUNTY to perform any and all obligations, required under this Agreement. The COUNTY's obligation to indemnify and hold the CITY harmless shall be subject to the limitations of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1988, Sections 466.02 and 466.04. • 6. Audit. Reports, Record Disclosures, and Monitoring Procedure a. The CONTRACTOR will maintain program statistical records required by the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT and submit program-narrative and statistical data at times prescribed by and in a format approved by the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT. b. CONTRACTOR will maintain financial accounting records required by the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT and submit financial reports at times prescribed by and on forms approved by the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT including, but not limited to, the following: i 1. Monthly Report of Accrued Expenditures to be submitted no later than fifteen (15) calendar days after the close of each reporting month. 2. Monthly Request for Reimbursement to be submitted no later than five (5) working days after the close of each reporting month. C. CONTRACTOR will furnish all required Management Information Systems forms of individual participants to be submitted at times prescribed by the COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT. 3 4A-N d. CONTRACTOR will operate all income-generating activities in • accordance with all Hennepin County Department of Training and Employment Assistance's Policy Statements, Memoranda and directives, and in conformance with the Regulations set forth in 49CFR 29-70.205. e. CONTRACTOR will maintain participant records for three (3) years for audit purposes. CONTRACTOR agrees that the COUNTY, State Auditor or any of their duly authorized representatives, at any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent and involve transactions relating to this Agreement. f. CONTRACTOR will include these requirements in all sub-contractors and assignments. g. The COUNTY, through the DEPARTMENT, may duplicate, use and disclose all data delivered under this Agreement in any manner consistent with statute and may have others do so. h. CONTRACTOR agrees to comply with OASC-10 and OMB Circulars Numbers A-87, A-95, A-102, A-110 and A-122, as those circulars relate to the utilization of funds, the operation of programs and the maintenance of records, books, accounts and.other documents. • 7. Cancellation This Agreement may be cancelled for any reason by either the COUNTY or the CITY upon thirty (30) days' written notice. 8. Modification of Agreement Any material alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of provisions of this Agreement shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing as an amendment to this Agreement signed by the parties hereto. 4 NR-5 CITY, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board of ?mmissioners having duly approved this Agreement on Ig_, and pursuant to such approval and the proper.County officials having signed this Agreement, the parties hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this Agreement will be legally valid and binding upon date of approval. Assistant County Attorney Date: APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Assistant County Attorney Ote: 0 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA By: Chairman of Its County Board And: Associate County Administrator And: Director of Training and Employment Assistance ATTEST: Deputy/Clerk of the County Board CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Mayor By: City Clerk ATTEST: City Finance Officer APPROVED AS TO LEGALITY: Assistant City Attorney E yR-6 0 BUDGET SUMMARY PARTICIPANT WAGES $15,000 TOTAL n $15,000 EXHIBIT A r'1 LJ w ? r WORKSTATEMENT 4A-7 ATTACHMENT I The City of Richfield Youth Employment Service (RYES) will employ approximately 8 youth within Richfield City departments. These jobs will average 330 hours and,pay an average of $5.68 per hour. The City will seek applicants from community-based organizations, including minority and will make every effort to employ the "most in need". Possible jobs include: Surveyor Typist Pool/Park Maintenance Pool/Park Supervisor Sign Painter General Park Maintenance Park Maintenance Supervisor Cashier Farmers' Market Coordinator Park Building & Ground Maintenance Weed Sprayer Section 8 Housing Inspector rime Prevention Monitors • 7 a • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 144 Agenda June 22, 1992 Issue Statement: Recognition of Adaptive Recreation/Learning Exchange (ABLE) Advisory Committee in honor of the City of Richfield receiving the "Innovative City Award" from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. Background: In 1988, the four cities and school districts of Edina, Eden Prairie, Bloomington and Richfield formed the South Suburban Adaptive Recreation Program for individuals with disabilities. The four cities, through their recreation departments, entered into a joint powers agreement which allowed cooperative programs, staffing and site use among the cities. The existing Community Education Learning Exchange cooperative works with the cities, which led to the formation of the Adaptive Recreation/Learning Exchange (ARLE). The ARLE Advisory Committee of parents, consumers and professionals was established to assist in providing guidance for the direction of program development within the adaptive programs. • In 1992, the City of Richfield received the Innovative City Award for the original inception of this cooperative program. The program would not be successful if not for the mutual commitment and work effort provided by the residents and staff of the four communities. The Richfield City Council would like to recognize ARLE, which represents the residents of the four cities, for the personal commitment and volunteer hours given. Recommended Motion: Congratulate the ARLE Advisory Committee and acknowledge receipt of the Innovative City Award. Basis of Recommendation: 1. ARLE has proven to be a successful advisory committee assisting the four city cooperative. 2. Through the cooperative effort, facilities and staff are shared to provide a greater spectrum of community offerings for a diverse population group. 3. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities recognized the City with the Innovative City Award, which would not have been possible without the cooperation of the four cities or the ARLE Committee. • 014 Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for the June 22, 1992 Council meeting. Members of the ARLE Advisory Committee will be present. Respect lly submitted, ProsserCitger Jam4ia JDP:ds • •