The URL can be used to link to this page

6-14-93 agendaCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, JUNE 14, 1993 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) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 24, 1993; (2) SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OF JUNE 7, 1993; AND (3) REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION OF JUNE 7, 1993 PRESENTATIONS 1. OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA 2. PRESENTATION OF GENE JACOBSEN CITIZEN OF THE YEAR AWARD TO GARNETT KIRCHNER • COUNCIL LETTER NO. 159 3. PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION TO 1993 MISS RICHFIELD CANDIDATES COUNCIL LETTER NO. 160 AGENDA APPROVAL 4. 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. 5A. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF 1993 AND 1994 AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS FOR PARTICIPATION IN URBAN CORPS INTERN PROGRAM C.L. 161 • B. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE AND SNOWPLOWING FOR JANUARY 1, 1992 TO DECEMBER 31, 1992, CITY PROJECT NO. 872, AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26, 1993 C.L. 162 C. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS COSTS OF 1994 ALLEY MAINTENANCE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 893, AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26, 1993 C.L. 163 D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CITY PROJECT NO. 873, 1992 LHN MAINTENANCE, AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26 1993 C.L. 164 E. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS COSTS OF 1994 MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENTS, LHN REDEVELOPMENT AREA, CITY PROJECT NO. 891, AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26, 1993 C.L. 165 F. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS DECLARING COSTS TO ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CITY PROJECT NO. 874, 1992 ILN MAINTENANCE, AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26, 1993 C.L. 166 G. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF 1994 MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENTS FOR ILN PROJECT AREA, PROPOSED CITY PROJECT NO. 895 C.L. 167 H. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR JANUARY 1, 1992 TO DECEMBER 31, 1992, ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL AND SETTING DATE OF HEARING FOR JULY 26, 1993 C.L. 168 I. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5,000 FOR BI-LEVEL METAL HALIDE LIGHT FIXTURES AT THE ICE ARENA FROM STERLING ELECTRIC IN AMOUNT OF $13,772.58 C.L. 169 J. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR NEW 1993 AUTO • DETAILING LICENSE FOR SUNSET AUTO DETAIL, 904 WEST 77h STREET C.L. 170 K. ESTIMATE #4 PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION OF MINIATURE GOLF COURSE; OLYMPIC POOLS, INC.; $49,039.20 L. FIRST AND FINAL PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF RICH ACRES GOLF COURSE POLE BUILDING; EBERT, INC.; $37,645.00 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER REGARDING BOND REFERENDUMS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 171 7. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 840 OF CITY CODE FOR REGULATION OF PUBLIC PARKS COUNCIL LETTER NO. 172 8. PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING ESTABLISHMENT OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS AND TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS (LHN, ILN, PASSS, CABA AND RICHFIELD REDISCOVERED) COUNCIL LETTER NO. 173 RESOLUTION 9. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION REGARDING AN ETHICS POLICY FOR RICHFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES COUNCIL LETTER NO. 174 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS & OTHER BUSINESS. 10. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO RICHFIELD COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING COUNCIL (DEFERRED FROM MARCH 8, 1993) COUNCIL LETTER NO. 175 11. CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PHASE I CONSTRUCTION OF 77TH STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO SHAFER CONTRACTING COMPANY, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $6,877,149.96 AND APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF $106,109.50 FROM WATER UTILITY FOR LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN WATER SYSTEM COUNCIL LETTER NO. 176 12. CONSIDERATION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR NEW MAIN LINE AND MINI-CAMERA SEWER TV SYSTEM FROM CUES, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $63,884 COUNCIL LETTER NO. 177 13. CONSIDERATION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR FUNDING FOR PHASE ONE MARKETING, PLANNING AND SERVICES TO TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA HIGH SPEED BUS PLAN DEVELOPMENT IN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $12,125 COUNCIL LETTER NO. 178 AIRPORT BUSINESS 14. AIRPORT STATUS REPORT CORRESPONDENCE 15. LEGISLATIVE REPORT COUNCIL CHOICE 16. COUNCIL DISCUSSION ITEMS 17. 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. /3 CITY OF RICHFIELD,.MINNESOTA Council Letter No.178 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration to authorize funding for Phase One marketing, planning and services to the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area High Speed Bus Plan development in an amount not to exceed $12,125. Background: The City of Richfield and Dakota County have discussed the need to develop a plan for high speed bus service on I-35W and I-494. The purpose of the service would be to reduce automobile traffic on I-35W and I-494. The high speed bus system would provided the following benefits: ? Reduce the amount of I-35W and I-494 diverted to local streets. ? Reduce pollution created by use of automobiles. ? Provide a less costly alternative to LRT. ? Provide an alternative that could be implemented much sooner than LRT. • ? Potentially reduce the need for I-35W and I-494 expansions beyond current design recommendations. After discussions with other transportation organizations including MnDOT, RTB, MTC and Met Council, it does not appear likely that a high speed bus plan will received priority consideration unless a special effort is made to provide planning material developed during this study. A number of other cities have been contacted regarding potential financial participation in this effort. Staff will proceed to solicit financial participation by other communities and organizations. Minnegasco has indicated interest in participating in such a study as well. The first phase cost of a study is estimated to be approximately $36,375. It is proposed that this would be split between the City of Richfield and Dakota County on a one-third/two-thirds split respectively. Participation by other cities would reduce our final contribution. Under this formula, Richfield's obligation would be approximately $12,125. Phase Two would not proceed unless more cities and organizations agree to participate financially. Recommended Motion: Authorize participation in Phase One of marketing, planning and services to the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area High Speed Bus Plan study in an amount not to exceed $12,125. 13°I Basis for Recommendation: 1. It is important to identify a mass transit alternative to reduce dependency on passenger vehicles. 2. There is no existing institution or organization to facilitate a high speed bus plan study. 3. Preliminary discussions in the State Legislature last year indicated reasonable support for exploring such a system. 4. New federal funding will become available this year to further planning and implementation efforts for alternative transportation systems. The first application deadline for such an alternative is early July. It would be extremely helpful for Dakota County, Richfield and other suburban cities to have an application prepared for that time. 5. The consultants who have provided the proposal for this work (Jill Schultz of JMS Communications & Research and Lisa Raduenz of LJR Transportation Planners & Consultants) have demonstrated a good capacity for providing work required for this project. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may decide not to authorize such an effort and, rather, depend upon other organizations to institute such an effort. 2. The Council may decide to wait to provide funding until a later time. 3. The Council may, decide to.wait until additional cities agree to support prior to proceeding with this effort. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for consideration at the Council meeting of June 14, 1993. No specific funding source has been identified at this time. This allows City staff to explore locating funding from a variety of sources prior to submitting a final revised budget document. Respe tfully submitted, Jam . Prosser City ager JDP:ds Attachment 0 ¦ /3-3 A PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE . MARKETING AND PLANNING AND SERVICES TO THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA HIGH SPEED BUS PLAN Consultant Team Jill M. Schultz, JMS Communications & Research Lisa J. Raduenz, LJR Transportation Planners and Consultants Scope The City of Richfield and Dakota County are embarking on a project which has the ultimate goal of implementing a demonstration project high speed bus system in the southwestern portion of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. This project is broken into three phases: Phase One. Policy Development and Marketing May 93 through Sept. 93 A. Introduce and market concept to targeted communities B. Define system boundaries/ service issues C. System cost identification D. Funding source identification Phase Two : Planning - Oct. 93 through Dec. 93 A. Local, state and federal funding targeted B. Draft legislative strategy This proposal addresses the first two phases with a workplan which will provide Richfield and Dakota County with the marketing and planning assistance necessary to garner the support needed from communities, regional and state agencies, and the Legislature to implement a high speed bus demonstration, project. The third phase is the operational /implementation stage and its scope is not addressed within this proposal. Phase Three: Demonstration Project - Jan. 94 through Dec. 96 A. Service design by area B. System operational plan C. Service implementation Workplan • The following marketing and planning services would be provided to Richfield and Dakota County during Phase One and Phase Two: 13-q Phase One. Policy Development and Marketing May `93 through September `93 A. Introduce and market concept to targeted communities-- -_.---_200 Hours Tasks 1. Analysis of transit policy environment 2. Development of objectives /timeline 3. Identify /research target communities 4. Definition of problems/ opportunities 5. Strategy for targeted groups 6. Organize, implement and evaluate marketing effort 7. Refinement of concept name / image 8. Development of visual image 9. Development of general plan presentation 10. Research and development of written materials 11. Ongoing coordination and communications B. Define system boundaries/service issues- .120 Hours Tasks is 1. System and stakeholder service issues identification 2. Operational plan development C System cost identification?.? _40 Hours Tasks 1. Analysis of system components, operational timeframes D. Funding source identification - ?. 125 Hours Tasks 1. Research of potential local and federal funding sources 2. Needs assessment and time line for funding qualification 3. Objectives/ strategy development to meet funding needs 4. Funding proposals design and applications. Phase One Deliverables Concept identification and image • Stakeholder service issue identification Workplan for Phases 2 and 3 Funding application development 13-5- Phase Two: Planning October `93 through December `93 0 - A. Local, state and federal funding targeted..--- Hours Tasks 1. Identify regional and state agency problems/ opportunities 2. Develop regional and state agency strategy 3. Refine visuals -- regional / state agency target 4. Refine general plan presentation -- regional /state agency target 5. Identification of federal agency issues 6. Identification of congressional issues 7. Develop and pursue federal strategy 8. Develop targeted information pieces 9. Develop general brochure /handout 10. Final operational plan completed 11. Funding proposals /applications drafted & submitted 12. Long term strategic plan developed B. Legislative strategy prepared -115 Hours • Tasks 1. Legislative objectives set 2. Elements of legislative proposal identified 3. Legislative proposal drafted 4. Legislative vehicle(s) and authors identified 5. Legislative strategy developed Phase Two deliverables: Operational plan Funding proposal application Draft legislation Revisions of project workplan is 13 ^ ?O Project Cost Detail Phase One - Policy Development and Marketing -- May 93 through Sept. 93 Hours Cost A. Introduce and market concept to communities 200 $15,000.0 B. Define system boundaries/ service issues 120 9,000.E C. System Cost Identification 40 3,000 00 D. Funding Source Identification 125 9,375 00 Total 485 $36,375A Phase Two - Planning -- Oct. 93 through Dec. 93 A. Local, state and federal funding targeted 610 $45,750 YO B. Legislative strategy prepared 115 8,625 00 Total 725 $54,375.0 Please note that this proposal includes development costs only. Nq pricing has been offered for the graphics design or printing of promotional materials. May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 0 Phase One - Policy and Marketing A. Market Concept B. Define System C. Identify Costs D. Identify Funding Phase Two - Planning A. Target Funding B. Legislative Strategy 13-7 JILL M. SCHULTZ 305 Kent Street, Box 26 Osceola, Wisconsin 54020 715-755-3331 EXPERIENCE R& Communications & Research, President Company performs research, public policy analysis, and a wide range of communications and marketing activities, specializing in transportation issues. Osceola, Wisconsin, January 1993 to present Minnesota Senate Research Legislative Analyst Conducted nonpartisan transportation research and policy analysis and presented results in written reports, memos and oral presentations to Senate policy committees, individual senators, and other legislative committees. Areas of Concentration; • Airport capacity and noise • Highway funding • Airline issues • High Speed Rail • Airport finance • TDM and TSM • Airport governance • ISTEA • FAR Part 150 • Transit coordination • Highway beautification • Metropolitan transit Issues • Transit governance • Transit funding St. Paul, Minnesota, September 1987 to January 1993 United Press International Editor, Reporter and Writer Responsible for covering all news and sports in Minnesota of a state and national interest, and for writing and reporting those stories for both newspaper and broadcast clients. Minneapolis, Minnesota, June 1987 to September 1987 United Press International Capitol Reporter Responsible for coverage of the 1987 Minnesota legislative session, Minnesota Supreme Court, Minnesota Court of Appeals and U.S. District Court in St. Paul. St. Paul, Minnesota, February 1987 to May 1987 Communications Director, Laser Machining Inc Handled general communications and public relations duties along with some advertising responsibilities for this small high-tech firm. 0 Somerset, Wisconsin, 1985 JP? United Press International Milwaukee Bureau Manager Managed the staff, selected new employees, handled client relations and was responsible for overseeing all state news and sports coverage from UPI- Wisconsin's headquarters in Milwaukee. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1984 United Press International Wisconsin Broadcast Editor Responsible for UPI-Wisconsin's report to its broadcast clients and for reshaping that report to meet clients' needs. Conducted a survey of all state broadcast clients, initiated weekly client news memos and headed the UPI- Wisconsin Broadcast Advisory Board. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1982 - 1984 United Press International Editor. Reporter and Writer Responsible for covering all news and sports in Wisconsin of a state and national interest and for writing and reporting those stories for both newspaper and broadcast clients. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1979 - 1984 EDUCATION Airport Noise and Land Use Planning Course Georgia Institute of Technology January 1988 Bachelor of Arts Degree, Journalism major University of Wisconsin May 1979 PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Women's Transportation Seminar Minnesota Chapter Member, 1990 to present Professional Development Chair, 1992 Special Recognitions Chair, 1991 PUBLICATIONS Light Rail Transit: What's Happened in the Twin Cities Over the Past Twenty Years; Report to the Senate Transportation Committee. Ham Lake -- The 1968-69 Proposal for a New Major Twin Cities Airport; Senate Research Report. Airport Noise and Capacity: Past and Future Issues for the Minneapolis- St. Paul International Airport; Local and Urban Government Committee Hearing Report. Airport Noise: Approaches to the Problem; Report to the Local and Urban Government Committee. Lisa Jane Raduenz 1425 Sargent Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55105 Home: (612) 690-2292 Work: (612) 227-1905 Small business owner with ten years' experience in transportation system planning and management. Professional emphasis on transit system design and efficiency of mobility systems for public school districts, private firms and public agencies. Additional areas of specialty include Travel Demand Management (TDM) and paratransit planning and system operations. ACCOMPLISHMENTS LJR, Inc. President and founder of LJR, Inc., a certified Women's Business Enterprise (WBE) transportation management and consulting firm, in 1992. Responsibilities include all corporate management functions, client development and relations, contract negotiation, project management and supervision of company personnel. Independent Transportation Management Services, Inc. (ITMS) • President and co-founder of transportation management firm in 1984. Principal-in-charge of all corporate projects and management responsibilities. PROJECT EXPERIENCE Travel Demand Management Program, Abbott Northwestern Hospital/ Minneapolis Children's Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN., 1992-93. Designed and currently implementing multi-modal TDM program for Abbott Northwestern, Minneapolis Children's and four other associated medical facilities to reduce single-occupant vehicle traffic and neighborhood parking congestion. Over 8,000 employees are targeted under the CommuteShare program. Public School District Cooperative Paratransit Program, Bloomington ISD #271, Richfield ISD #280, Wayzata ISD #284, 1989-1992. Designed and managed on a daily basis a shared-cost transportation program which reduced annual student paratransit expenses for three school districts by as much as twenty-eight percent per year. Wrote and reviewed contract bid specifications, audited annual transportation budgets, performed contract negotiations and brokered paratransit services among district fleets and private providers. 13-/0 Transportation Cost-Efficiency Analysis, Hennepin Technical Centers, Cooperative District #287, Minneapolis, MN., 1991. Researched and reviewed student transportation system involving twenty-five separate educational sites in the western suburban metropolitan area. Analysis included recommendations for improvements in logistical efficiencies, transportation budget reductions and increased site services. System transports approximately 5,000 students each day. Liability Issues of Minnesota Volunteer Driver Programs, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Office of Transit, St. Paul, MN., 1991. Researched, identified and compiled comprehensive listing of over 12,000 state volunteer driving programs, including nonprofit and elderly/handicapped transit systems. Project included working directly with the Minnesota Office on Volunteerism, the Minnesota Department of Human Services, the University of Minnesota Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and the Minnesota Department of Administration (Risk Management Division), as well as extensive contact with statewide Regional Development Centers (RDCs). Authored and presented final report and recommendations for continued statewide transportation risk management and volunteer driver recruitment and education initiatives. • Strategies for Improving Energy Efficiencies within Minnesota's Transportation Sector, Minnesota Department of Public Service, St. Paul, MN., 1991. Researched and authored detailed report providing strategies for energy ouput reduction within all modes, including transit, dry goods movement, rail and waterways. Report concentrated on providing strategies to track energy inputs and outputs, on cooperative data-gathering and sharing among various state and regional agencies and on both short and long-term initiatives to reduce energy consumption in the predominant use of the single occupant vehicle. Technical Transit Planning in Rural Minnesota Communities, Minnesota Department of Public Service, St. Paul, MN., 1990-91. Worked directly with the Department's Energy Division Community Development Grant Program to plan specific transit initiatives and service in Greater Minnesota communities, including the cities of Roseau, LaCrescent and LaCrosse. Twin Cities' Reverse Commute Transit Service, Urban Mass Transit Administration, 1988. Designed, managed and provided a privately- sponsored employee reverse commute transit service under an UMTA Entrepreneurial Services Grant administered by the Regional Transit Board. /3-/ EDUCATION 10 University of Minnesota, Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Masters of Planning degree with an emphasis in Land Use and Human Settlements and Public Policy (in progress) University of Minnesota, College of Liberal Arts, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Bachelor of Arts degree with a major in English Education and a minor in Spanish PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS AND PUBLICATIONS Women's Transportation Seminar, Minnesota Chapter President 1992, Corporate Relations Chair 1991, Program Chair 1989 and 1990, Scholarship Co-chair, 1989. National Fundraising Committee Member, 1992. Member of the Year, 1993. Minnesota Guidestar Executive Committe, Minnesota Department is of Transportation (Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems Program) Member, 1993. Chair, IVHS Funding Subcommittee, 1993. Governor's Search Committee for Commissioner of Transportation Member, 1990. Regional Transit Board Rideshare Advisory Committee Member, 1988-1993. Association for Commuter Transportation, Minnesota Chapter Member, 1987-1993. Minnesota Society of Surveyors and Engineers Member, 1992-93. Minnesota Association for Pupil Transportation Member, 1985-1993. University of Minnesota, Center for Transportation Studies Presenter, 1990 Annual Transportation Research Conference, Abstract entitled "The Role of the Private Sector in Changing Transportation Systems to Meet Societal Needs". CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 177 Agenda June 14, 1993 • Issue Statement: Award of contract for a new sewer TV system. Background: The approved 1993 sewer maintenance capital outlay budget contains $85,000 for the purchase of a sewer TV system. Bids were opened on May 17, 1993 for a main line TV trailer plus a mini-camera (for small pipes and service lines). The mini-camera was bid separately so that, in the event the combined cost of the two cameras exceeded the budget, we could drop the mini-camera. The specification required that the mini-camera be compatible with its companion main line camera. For that reason, the mini- camera must be purchased with its companion main line camera. The bids are as follows: Vendor Main Line Mini-Camera Total Flexible Pipe Tool Company $72,476 $17,190 $89,666 Northern Water Works Supply 65,567 15,731 81,298 Aries Industries, Inc. 56,700 12,577 69,277 Cues, Inc. 48,717 15,167 63,884 Recommended Motion: Award a contract for the main line and mini-camera to Cues, Inc. for a total of $63,884. .; Basis for Recommendation: 1. Cues, Inc. submitted the overall low bid. Cues, Inc. developed the first commercially produced sewer camera and has a long history of quality equipment. 2. Ordering both cameras from the same vendor now will allow the mini camera to be used on the camera carrier as a backup to the main line camera. 3. There is sufficient funding available for purchase of both cameras. Alternative Recommendation: Council could reject all of the bids and instruct staff to obtain new quotations on this equipment. However, staff believes the bids received are in line with the equipment specified from reputable vendors. Discussion/Decision Mode: Staff is requesting approval meeting. • at the June 14, 1993 Council Res tfully submitted, Jam Prosser Cit nager JDP:cak is-i CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening May 17, 1993 11:00 A.M. One (1) New Sewer TV System Bid No. 93-10 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for one (1) new sewer tv system, bid no. 93-10, as advertised in the official newspaper on May 5, 1993. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Donald Fondrick, Community Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative Roxi Braa, Administrative Aide The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR ; BID ; AMOUNT ; AMOUNT SECURITY ; mini camera/ ; mini camera ; trailer Northern Water Works ; 5% ; $ 65,567.00 ; $ 15,731.00 ; Supply ; Bid Bond Brooklyn Park, MN Flexible Pipe Tool Co.; 5% ; $ 72,476.00 ; $ 17,190.00 ; Minneapolis, MN ; Bid Bond CUES, Inc. ; cashier's; $ 48,717.00 12,577.00 Orlando, Florida ; check Aries Industries, Inc.; cashier's; $ 56,700.00 ; $ 12,577.00 ; Sussex, Wisconsin check The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 14, 1993 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 .CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.176 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement:. Recommendation to award Phase I construction contract for the 77th Street improvement project and approve payment of the local share of the contract. Background: Bids were opened Monday, June 7, 1993, under direction of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), for Phase I of 77th Street construction. This Phase I construction contract includes: - excavation and sheet piling; - grading; - new storm sewer; - relocated sanitary sewer and a lift station; - new and relocated watermain and hydrants; - concrete and bituminous road paving; - sidewalks and walking paths; - street lighting; - traffic signals; - screenwalls; - turf establishment; • - restoration of Roosevelt Park facilities; - traffic and street signs; - pavement markings; - demolition of three commercial buildings; - restoration of one commercial building; and, - traffic maintenance during construction. The landscaping, plants and trees are not included and will be bid separately. Although the contract is with MnDOT and not the City, it is necessary for the City of Richfield to make a recommendation for action on the award of contract(s); i.e., reject bids or favor award to apparent low bidder. The attached bid tabulation summary indicates that Shafer Contracting Company Inc. has submitted the lowest responsible bid in keeping with state specifications, at $6,877,149.96. MnDOT officials have reviewed all the bids submitted and confirmed Shafer Contracting Company Inc. as the lowest bidder. There appears to be no cause to reject the bid. The bid is 6% under the engineer's estimate of $7,351,664.90. The contractor must comply with a State of Minnesota goal of having at least 13% of the work performed by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises which helps MnDOT and Richfield's project reach the City's Equal Employment Opportunity goals to qualify for federal funding. The City must provide an estimated $106,109.50 in City water revenues to pay for certain water improvements included in Phase I?-I . I of the 77th Street project and 5% of the remaining construction costs which amount to $338,552.02 using the City's municipal state aid streets funds. However, under the cooperative agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnDOT will give the City credit for funds the City has already spent on the 77th Street project. Therefore, MnDOT will provide the 5% City share on this construction project. Recommended Motion: Make recommendation for award of contract for Phase I construction of the 77th Street improvement project to Shafer Contracting Company Inc. for $6,877,149.96 and approve payment of $106,109.50 from the water utility for the local share of the costs for improvements in the water system. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City must make a recommendation for action on the award of contract as part of the MnDOT process. 2. Shafer Contracting Company Inc. has submitted the lowest .responsible bid and a review by MnDOT and City staffs of their bid gives no cause to reject it. 3. 'The total amount specified by Shafer Contracting Company Inc. to complete the construction work is in keeping with the engineer's estimate of $7,351,664.90 being 6% under that • estimate. 4. The local share of $106,109.50 is an accurate reflection of improvements to the water system. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Council is asked to make a recommendation at the June 14, 1993 Council meeting. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City nager JDP:cak Attachment • //-a n L J CITY OF RICHFIELD 77TH STREET PHASE I CONSTRUCTION MINNESOTA PROJECT SP-157-108-10 BID TABULATION SUMMARY JUNE 7, 1993 n LJ Name of Construction Company Bid Amount Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. $6,877,149.96 C. S. McCrossan, Inc. $6,881,305.52 Arcon Construction Company, Inc. $6,960,774.36 Progressive Contractors, Inc. $7,147,227.67 Richard Knutson, Inc. $7,641,033.83 Carl Bolander and Sons, Inc. $7,849,919.89 Engineer's Estimate $7,351,664.90 0 1?-3 • CITY OF RICHFIELD Tue Jun 8, 1993 12:50 PM BUDGET FOR PHASES I, II AND III OF 77TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PHASE I COSTS SOURCE OF FUNDS ----------------------- RIGHT OF WAY --------------- $5,632,786 --------------------- FEDERAL 80% ------------ $20,840,000 CONSTRUCTION $6,877,150 STATE 15% $5,210,000 OTHER EXPENSES $3,977,538 MSAS 5% $2,344,476 ----------------------- --------------- CITY $244,679 SUB-TOTAL $16,487,474 -------------------- ------------ TOTAL $28,639,155 PHASE II ----------------------- RIGHT OF WAY --------------- $4,359,268 CONSTRUCTION $8,000,000 OTHER EXPENSES $1,600,000 ----------------------- SUB-TOTAL --------------- $13,959,268 of AL FOR PHASES I & II $30,446,742 PHASE III ----------------------- RIGHT OF WAY --------------- $5,402,000 CONSTRUCTION $10,000,000 OTHER EXPENSES $1,000,000 ----------------------- SUB-TOTAL --------------- $16,402,000 TOTAL FOR ALL PHASES $46,848,742 NOTE: THE CITY OF RICHF IELD HAS ALREADY SPENT $2,344,475.76 ON THE PROJECT. FEDERAL/STATE/ CITY SHARE TO B E SPLIT 80/15/5$ RESPECTIVELY. SO, STATE WILL PICK UP ENTIRE LOCAL SHARE AT LEAST THROUGH PHASE II. 77BUDGET RANGE A1..E36 FONT 12 0 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ?f Bid Opening 1 June 7, 1993 2:00 P.M. Minnesota State Project No. 157-108-10 77th Street Between TH 35W and Portland Avenue South (MSAS 100) 77th Street Grade, Aggregate Base, Concrete Pavement, Storm Sewer, Water Main Sanitary Sewer, Noise Wall, Lighting, Traffic Control Signal Systems, and Miscellaneous Construction. Pursuant to requirements, a meeting was called by Merl Overvig, MnDOT, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, bids for Minnesota State Project 157-108-10 (MSAS 100) 77th Street, as advertised in the official newspaper on May 12, 19, and 26, 1993. Present: Merl Overvig, MnDot Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Donald Fondrick, Community Services Director Mike Eastling, City Engineer • • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR Acron Construction Co. Carl Bolander & Sons Progressive Contractors, Inc. C.S. McRossan, Inc. Shafer Contracting, Inc. Richard Knutson, Inc. TOTAL BID $ 6,960,774.36 $ 7,849,919.89 $ 7,147,227.67 $ 6,881,305.52 $ 6,877,149.96 $ 7,641,033.83 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the June 14, 1993 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk I D • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 175 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration of appointments to the Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council. (Deferred from March 8, 1993.) Background: Currently, there are four vacancies on the Richfield Community Human Services Planning Council (RCHSPC) as a result of resignations or replacement appointments to various Boards and Commissions. Those vacancies include representation from the: ? Human Services Commission, ? Community Services Commission, ? Advisory Board of Health, and ? Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Lorraine Schreyer, representing the Human Services Commission, and Joan Helmberger, representing the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, have expressed an interest in serving on the RCHSPC. The length of the RCHSPC member's term of service will be the same as the individuals's term on the Board/Commission being represented. • When recommendations to fill the remaining two vacancies are received, they will be presented at a future City Council meeting. Recommended Motion: Appoint Lorraine Schreyer as the Human Services Commission representative and Joan Helmberger as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority representative to fill two of the four vacancies on the RCHSPC. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The RCHSPC currently has four vacancies. 2. The appointments will continue representation from all of the City's Boards and Commissions. 3. The persons to be appointed have expressed an interest in serving on the RCHSPC. 4. Filling these vacancies will ensure a quorum for future meetings. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Defer the appointments to a later Council meeting. 0 I o'I • • Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is placed on the June 14, 1993 Council agenda for Council consideration. The appointments will begin immediately. JDP:cak Copy: Camillo DeSantis, RCHSPC Chair Respec f ly submitted, James Prosser City nager 0 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 174 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration of a resolution regarding an ethics policy for Richfield City employees. Background: After review of a draft ethics policy at the June 7 City Council Study Session, the Council directed staff to prepare a resolution regarding the policy and that it be placed on the June 14 agenda for Council action. The Council previously directed staff to prepare a draft ethics policy to address issues where there is a potential conflict of interest. The City Attorney prepared a draft ethics policy which appears to address the concerns expressed by staff and Council. The purpose of the ethics policy is to: ? ensure that actions and decisions of City employees continue to be free from improper influence of personal and financial interests; • ? provide guidance to City employees who are confronted with a potential conflict or interest; and ? uphold the public confidence in the City's conduct of public matters. The City Council also suggested that any necessary changes to the City Charter be recommended to the Charter Commission, however, the City Attorney does not recommend any Charter changes. Recommended Motion: Approval of a resolution regarding an ethics policy for Richfield City employees. Basis for Recommendation: ,1. The policy will clarify a number of ethics issues which may be faced by City employees. 2. The City Council reviewed the draft ethics policy at the June 7 Study Session. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may decide to amend the ethics policy. • 2. The Council may decide to undertake additional research. 3. The Council may decide to defer this item to a later date. Q-1 • Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for Council action at the City Council meeting on June 14, 1993. Respectf ly submitted, James Prosser City M ager JDP:cak CJ 9 9-j- RESOLUTION NO. • A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A CODE OF ETHICS FOR RICHFIELD CITY EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, its elected and appointed officials and employees, have conducted the City's business in the past according to the highest ethical standards, such that decisions and actions have been based upon the public interest rather than personal and financial interests of the officials and employees; and WHEREAS, the City of Richfield, through its City Charter, has adopted a code of ethics that governs the actions of elected officials, members of boards and commissions, and the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the City desires to establish a similar code of ethics that will provide guidance and establish standards for City employees who are not governed by the City Charter code of ethics. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The attached Code of Ethics is hereby approved and adopted. • 2. This resolution and the attached Code of Ethics are effective immediately. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk LJ n• JUN 09 193 08:41 HOLMES & GRAVEN P.3 9-3 CITY OF RICHFIELD CODE OF ETHICS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES Section 1. Sco e. This code of ethics applies to all full-time and part-time paid employees of the City of Richfield, except the city manager. The city manager is subject to the provisions of Chapter 12 of the Richfield City Charter. Section 2. Fur ose. The City of Richfield Is proud of its employees and the valuable services that they provide to the City and its citizens. The City also values the individual contribu- tions that its employees have made and continue to make to the. Richfield community, on the employees' personal time. The City and its employees have established an exemplary record of conducting the City's affairs in a manner that furthers the interests of the public, without improper influence on the decision-making process. The purpose of this code of ethics is to: ensure that the actions and decisions of City employees continue to be free from the improper influence of personal and financial interests; provide guidance to City employees who are confronted with a potential conflict of interest; and uphold the public confidence in the City's conduct of public matters. Section 3. Definitions. For purposes of this code of ethics, the following terms have the meanings given them: as "Employee's household" means the person or persons with whom an employee resides. b. "Employee's family" means the spouse, parent, child, mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother-in-law or sister-in-law of an employee. Section 4. Prohibited Actions. a. No employee shall take part in or otherwise attempt .to influence the outcome of any City action or decision which could substantially affect the financial interests of the employee, a member of the employee's household or family, or an organization with which the employee is associated. The prohibition. under this paragraph does not apply if the effect of the decision or action on the employee, employee's house- hold or family will be no greater than on other members of the business, profession or occupation or if the effect on the organization with which the employee is affiliated is indi- rect, remote, and insubstantial. b. No employee shall misuse his or her position to secure special privileges or exemptions for himself or herself or any other person. c. No employee shall directly or indirectly receive or agree to receive any compensation, gift, reward or gratuity in 1 JUN 09 93 08:43 HOLMES & GRAVEN q-4 P.4 payment for the performance of his or her official duties, except as may be provided by law. Section 5. Disclosure Required., An employee who in the discharge of his or her duties would be required to take an action or make a decision which could substantially affect the financial interests of the employee, a member of the employee's household or family, or organization with which the employee is associated, shall take the following actions: a. The employee shall prepare a written statement which includes the employee's name, address, position, signature, date, the person notified of the potential conflict, a description of the matter requiring action or decision and a description of the nature of the potential conflict of interest. b. Within one week after the employee becomes aware of the potential conflict of interest, the employee shall deliver copies of the statement to the City Clerk (or if the employee is the City Clerk, to the City Manager) and to the employee's immediate supervisor. No disclosure statement.is required if the effect of the decision or action on the employee, employee's household or family will be no greater than on other members of the business, profession or • occupation or if the effect on the organization with which the employee is affiliated is indirect, remote, and insubstantial. Section 6. • Determination; Reassignment, Upon receipt of a disclosure statement from An employee, the employee's supervisor shall determine whether a potential conflict of interest exists which is proscribed by Section 4 of this code of ethics. If an employee has a potential conflict of interest, the supervisor shall immediately assign the matter to another employee who does not have a potential conflict of interest. if the supervisor determines that the employee does not have a potential conflict of interest that is proscribed by Section 4, and if the city manager accepts that determination, no reassignment is required. The supervisor shall prepare a written memo summarizing the basis for his or her determination regarding the existence of a potential conflict of interest. Section 7. Waiver. Upon recommendation of the city manager, the City Council may waive the reassignment provisions of Section f of this code of ethics, after making the following findings: a. That there is no other employee in the City who: (i) is qualified to perform the official duties required in connection with the act or decision and (ii) does not have a potential conflict of interest; and b. That disqualification of the employee will require the City to retain an outside consultant at additional expense to the City; and JUN 09 193 08:43 HOLMES & GRAVEN P.5 9-S co That the potential conflict of,interest is so remote or insubstantial that the employee'scontinued performance of his or her official duties ' wqul:d not erode public confidence in the decision-making process; and d. That adequate supervision or subsequent review is available to assure that the act or decision is made in the public interest; and e. That the cost and administrative inconvenience that would result from the employee's reassignment significantly outweigh any detrimental aspects of the potential conflict of interest. When any waiver is granted under this Section 41 the city manager or designee shall monitor the progress of the project for which the wal,ver was granted and shall review City actions and decisions as necessary to ensure that the public interest is served. Section 8. Restriction-on Representation. For one year after termination of employment with the City, no former employee of the City shall appear personally before any court or governmental department or agency as agent or representative for anyone other than the. City in connection with any proceeding, application, request for ruling or other determination, contract, claim, controversy, charge, accusation, arrest, or other particular matter in which the City is substantially interested, and with respect to which the employee took any action 'or made any decision as an employee of the City at any time within a period of one year prior to the termination of employment. Section 9. Discipline. Any employee who knowingly violates any provision of Section 4 of this policy, or who knowingly fails to submit a statement required by this policy or submits a statement which the employee knows contains false information or omits required information, will be subject to discipline. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield on 1993. Martin J. 1 Kirsch, Mayor James Prosser, City Manager 0 3 8 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 173 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Public hearing and consideration of the adoption of a resolution approving the establishment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and modifications to existing redevelopment project areas and tax increment districts (LHN, ILN, PASSS, CABA, and Richfield Rediscovered). Background: At their May 17 meeting, the HRA approved the establishment of the Richfield Rediscovered Redevelopment Project and modifications to existing projects. They are now requesting the City Council to adopt the attached resolution which would approve the establishment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project and modify existing projects as noted above. In addition to the information presented in this letter, representatives of Publicorp will be available at the June 14 City Council meeting to answer questions. The HRA, at the request of the City Council, has developed a number of strategies to address housing and commercial redevelopment needs. Establishing a development fund makes it possible for the HRA to effectively use existing financial • resources to fund these strategies. Establishment of a development fund is accomplished by establishment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and modifications to the existing redevelopment project areas and tax increment districts. The major modifications include project pooling and expansion of the project areas to include apartment complexes. There are many potential projects which could be supported by a development fund. Three priority projects include an apartment rehabilitation/management program, Richfield Rediscovered and Transformation Homes. Each of these projects is described in greater detail in the attachment along with a description of some aspects of the development fund. Project pooling would also more effectively utilize limited financial resources. The advantages include: 1. Projects with strong cash flows can support, if necessary, projects with a weaker cash flow. 2. Expenses may be reduced by lessening the need for bond sales and possibly the need for additional tax increment districts. 3. Provide credit enhancements for bonds if and when sold. The above advantages can be realized without lengthening the existing bond debt amortization schedules. Because of these advantages, most cities utilizing tax increment financing incorporate this pooling concept. g -1 E 9 The attached document includes the Redevelopment Plan For Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and modifications to all existing projects. Pooling would be established by placing all the existing redevelopment and tax increment districts in one redevelopment district, the proposed name of which is the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The boundary generally conforms to the existing redevelopment project boundary for Richfield Rediscovered and also includes existing projects. The southeast quadrant of Richfield has been added as have the locations of the larger apartment developments which were outside existing boundaries. No existing project boundaries are being changed. The inclusion of this southeast area would be prudent for long range planning purposes. The inclusion of apartments could facilitate future improvements to these properties. Note the maps in the redevelopment project area plan, Appendix A page A-2, and Appendix B page B-2. The Richfield Redevelopment Plan is basically 'a compilation of previously approved redevelopment plans (ILN, LHN, PASSS, CABA and Richfield Rediscovered A and B). Note the Table of Contents. ? Page 3 is a Statement of Public Purpose and explains the basis for creating the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. ? Goals and Objectives are listed on pages 4-6. ? Page 6 also lists anticipated public activities and page 8 lists anticipated private development activities. ? Pages 10-22 are the amendments to the existing redevelopment and tax increment areas which would effectuate pooling. ? On page 12 is a proposed modification to the ILN Tax Increment District. The modification would delete from the tax increment district the Corporate Travel property on 76th Street and Girard Avenue. The market value has dropped from $3.6 million in 1985 to $1.8 million for taxes payable in 1993. (The plan identifies the value drop by use of tax capacity). It is unlikely that this property will return to its previous valuation. The project cash flow would benefit from this deletion by approximately $125,000. Amendments to each of the redevelopment plans and tax increment plans must be approved concurrently with the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Plan to establish the Richfield Redevelopment Project to implement the pooling. The resolution which follows, if adopted, would permit the implementation of the pooling concept. Ba Recommended Motion: Adopt a motion which approves the attached resolution which establishes the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and modifies existing redevelopment project areas and tax increment districts including the LHN, ILN, PASSS, CABA and Richfield Rediscovered. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The HRA is proposing to utilize limited financial resources in a more effective manner. 2. As a city, the transition opportunities which present themselves must be aggressively met. 3. Pooling of tax increment project would: a. strengthen the cash flows of all existing tax increment projects with debt service. b. increase the possibility of credit enhancements for future projects which may require them. c. reduce operating expenses related to tax increment, projects. 4. Pooling can be implemented without lengthening the debt service schedules of any projects. 5. Pooling is a good fiscal tool for prudent management of tax increment cash flows. • 6. The pooling proposal is consistent with state laws. 7. Neither of the proposals is in conflict with the five point policy adopted by the HRA several years ago (attached). 8. The HRA at their meeting of May 17 approved the establishment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project and modifications to existing projects and districts. 9. The Planning Commission at their meeting of May 25 found the action of the HRA to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 10. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun-Current on May 2, 1993. 11. Hennepin County and the Richfield School District were notified of the public hearing. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Modify the recommendation. 2. Delay proposed action. 0 8-3 Discussion/Decision Mode: This proposal is presented for consideration in response to the action taken by the HRA in April and May. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City anager JDP:cak 0 0 X-? • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN REDEVELOPMENT PLANS AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield Minnesota as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01 The City Council (the "Council") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City") together with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "HRA") in and for the City of Richfield, Minnesota, have established the Lyndale-Hub-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area ("LHN Project Area"), the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area ("ILN Project Area") and the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Tax Increment Financing District ("ILN District"), the Cedar Avenue Business Area Redevelopment Project Area ("CABA Project Area") and the Cedar Avenue Business Area Tax Increment Financing District ("CABA District"), the Penn Avenue and Sixty Sixth Street Redevelopment Project Area ("PASSS Project Area") and Penn Avenue and Sixty Sixth Street Tax • Increment Financing District ("PASSS District"), Redevelopment Project Area A and Tax Increment Financing District A-1 ("District A-1") and Tax Increment Financing District A-2 ("District A-2"), and Redevelopment Project Area B and Tax Increment Financing District B-1 ("District B-11') and Tax Increment Financing District B-2 ("District B-21'), collectively the "Project Areas" and "Tax Increment Financing Districts"). 1.02 The Council and the HRA have adopted and modified from time to time the Redevelopment Program and Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans (collectively the "Modified Plans") relating to each of the respective Project Areas and Tax Increment Financing Districts. 1.03 The Council and HRA have identified blighted areas within the city as being in need of development and redevelopment which are not currently within the boundaries of existing Project Areas. 1.04 The Council and the HRA anticipate that the costs of financing redevelopment will be reduced through the sharing of tax increments among existing Project Areas by means of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area (the "Richfield Redevelopment Plan"). 1.05 The Council and the HRA have caused to be prepared a Redevelopment Plan for the Richfield Redevelopment • Project Area which encompasses all existing Project Areas and also includes areas previously not included in the Project Areas and have caused to be prepared Modified Plans on file with the HRA, which modify the redevelopment activities and expenditures budgets for each Project Area and TIF District. 1.06 The executive director of the HRA transmitted copies of the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and Modified Plans to the City of Richfield Planning Commission, school boards of Independent School District No. 280, Intermediate School District No. 287, and the board of commissioners of Hennepin County for review and comment and timely notified said public bodies of the public hearings to be held by the City. 1.07 The City of Richfield Planning Commission has found that the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and Modified Plans are in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 1.08 By resolution dated May 17, 1993, the Board of Commissioners of the HRA approved the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans. 1.09 The Council has on this date held a public hearing regarding the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the • Modified Plans at which the views of all interested persons were heard. Section 2. Council Findings and Approval. 2.01 The Council finds that the objective of encouraging development, redevelopment, and new construction within the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and Project Areas will be advanced by adoption of the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and Modified Plans. 2.02 It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the Council, that the development proposed in the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans could not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that therefore the use of tax increment financing, and other financial aid sought, is necessary. 2.03 The Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans conform to the general plan of development of the City as a whole. 2.04 The Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans • will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and all Project Areas therein by private enterprise. 8-? • 2.05 The boundaries of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area are as described in the Richfield Redevelopment Plan, which document is incorporated herein by reference. The Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans do not change the classification or boundaries of any TIF District. 2.06 The Council has relied upon the reports and recommendations of its staff and the HRA and the HRA's staff as well as the personal knowledge of members of the Council in reaching its conclusions regarding the Richfield Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans. 2.07 The Richfield Redevelopment Plan and Modified Plans are hereby approved and adopted by the Council. 2.08 HRA and City staff are directed to formulate procedures which will result in implementation of the establishment of the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area and the methodology for sharing tax increments among Project Areas. 2.09 HRA and City staff is directed to forward copies of the Redevelopment Plan and the Modified Plans to Hennepin County and the State of Minnesota Department of Revenue, • as outlined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 2. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P..Ferber, City Clerk 9- ? • REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA and MODIFICATIONS TO THE LHN COMMERCIAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM for LHN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ILN REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for ILN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA including the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for ILN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for CABA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA including the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for CABA TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for PASSS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA including the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for PASSS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT • REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA A including the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for A-1 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT and TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for A-2 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN for REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA B including the TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for B-1 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT and TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN for B-2 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT RICHFIELD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. in and for the CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA HRA Adoption: May 17, 1993 City Council Adoption: June 14, 1993 -g MAYOR Martin Kirsch CITY COUNCIL Michael Sandahl Susan Rosenberg Russ Susag Donald Priebe HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Thomas Harms Russ Susag Joan Helmberger Vern Luettinger Larry Wozniczka PLANNING COMMISSION Robert Elliott Timothy Erlander Michael Gallagher Daniel Linnihan • Morris Nilsen, II Thomas Scaglia William Snyder Kristal Stokes Paul Wasko CITY MANAGER/HRA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR James Prosser COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Byron Wallace, Director Bruce Palmborg, Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator Kathy Jablonsky, Redevelopment Specialist HRA ATTORNEYS John Dean, Holmes & Graven Steven Bubul, Holmes & Graven HRA FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS Sidney Inman, Publicorp, Inc. • Mark Ruff, Publicorp, Inc. s -9 0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Municipal Action Taken ...................................................:........................................ i Definitions ....................................................................:......................................... 1 Statement of Public Purpose ..................................................................................... 3 Statutory Authority .................................................................................................. 4 Statement of Goals and Objectives ............................................................................ 4 Estimated Public Costs ............................................................................................. 6 Boundary of Richfield Project Area ............................................................................. 7 Parcels in Acquisition and Relocation ......................................................................... 7 Environmental Considerations ................................................................................... 7 0 Proposed Land Use .................................................................................................. 7 Development Activity in Richfield Project Area ............................................................ 8 Administration and Maintenance of Richfield Project Area ............................................. 8 Richfield Proiect Area Modifications ........................................................................... 9 Modification to LHN Redevelopment Project Area ...................................................... 11 Modification to ILN Redevelopment Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan........ 12 Modification to CABA Redevelopment Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan ..... 14 Modification to PASSS Redevelopment Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan ...16 Modification to Redevelopment Project Area A and Tax Increment Financing Plans......... 18 Modification to Redevelopment Project Area B and Tax Increment Financing Plans......... 20 Appendix A: Richfield Project Area Map and Description ...............................................A Appendix B: Tax Increment Districts and Project Areas Map .........:............................... B S -1c) MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Based upon the statutory authority described in the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Project Area attached hereto, the public purpose findings by the City Council of the City of Richfield and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Richfield and for the purpose of fulfilling the City's redevelopment goals and objectives the City Council established Richfield Project Area pursuant to and in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended. The following municipal action was taken in connection therewith: June 14,1993: The Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area was adopted by the City Council MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Lyndale-Hub-Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Project Area October 15, 1975: The Commercial Improvement Program for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area was adopted by the City Council. . June 14, 1993: The Commercial Improvement Program for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area was modified by the City Council. MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Interstate-Lyndale-Nicol let (ILN) Redevelopment Project Area October 21, 1985: The Redevelopment Plan for the ILN Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District were adopted by the City Council June 14, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan for the ILN Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District were modified by the City Council F-1 L 9-// MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Cedar Avenue Business Areas (CABA) Redevelopment Project Area 0 October 21, 1985: The Redevelopment Plan for the CABA Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the CABA Tax Increment Financing District were adopted by the City Council June 14, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan for the CABA Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the CABA Tax Increment Financing District were modified by the City Council. MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Penn Avenue and Sixty Sixth Street (PASSS) Redevelopment Project Area December 18, 1989: The Redevelopment Plan for the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District were adopted by the City Council June 14, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan for the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District were modified by the City Council MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Redevelopment Project Area A July 23, 1990: The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area A and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Tax Increment Financing District A-1 were adopted by the City Council June 14, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area A and the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing District A-1 and Tax Increment Financing District A-2 were modified by the City Council. • ? -I GL MUNICIPAL ACTION TAKEN Redevelopment Project Area B July 23, 1990: The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area B and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Tax Increment Financing District B-1 were adopted by the City Council. June 14, 1993: The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area B and the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing District B-1 and Tax Increment Financing District B-2 were modified by the City Council. F- r -I LJ 0 iii SS-/3 01, A. Definitions. The terms defined below shall, for purposes of this Development Program, have the meanings herein specified, unless the context otherwise specifically requires: "CABA Redevelopment Project Area" means the Cedar Avenue Business Area Redevelopment Project Area as modified. "City" means the City of Richfield, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota designated as a home rule charter city. "Comprehensive Plan" means the documents which contain the objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, development and preservation for all lands and water within the City. "Council" means the City Council of the City, also referred to as the governing body. (See "Governing Body" below). t "County" means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota. "Governing Body" means the duly elected City Council. "HRA" means the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Richfield. "HRA Act" means Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047, as amended. "ILN Redevelopment Project Area" means the Interstate-Lyndale-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area as modified. "LHN Redevelopment Project Area" means the Lyndale-Hub-Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area established by the Council as modified. "Municipality" means any city, however organized as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 469.125, Subdivision 2, "PASSS Redevelopment Project Area" means the Penn Avenue and Sixty Sixth Street Redevelopment Project Area as modified. "Richfield Project Area" means the Richfield Redevelopment Project established by the Council on June 14, 1993. "Redevelopment Plans" means the Commercial Improvement Program for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area and the Redevelopment Plans for the ILN Redevelopment Project Area, the CABA Redevelopment Project Area, the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area, Redevelopment Project Area A and Redevelopment Project Area B. ? - )C? "Redevelopment Project Areas" means the LHN Redevelopment Project Area, • the ILN Redevelopment Project Area, the CABA Redevelopment Project Area, the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area, Redevelopment Project Area A and Redevelopment Project Area B. "Richfield Redevelopment Plan" means the Richfield Plan adopted by the City on June 14, 1993. "School District" means Independent School District No. 280. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment Financing Districts" means the LHN Redevelopment Project Area, the ILN Redevelopment Project Area, the CABA Tax Increment Financing District, the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District, Tax Increment Financing District A-1, Tax Increment Financing District A-2, Tax Increment Financing District B-1, and Tax Increment Financing District B-2. "Tax Increment Financing Plans" means the Commercial Improvement Plan for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area, the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District, the Tax Increment Financing .Plans for the CABA Tax Increment Financing District, the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District, the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-1, the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-2, Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-1, and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment • Financing District B-2. "Tax Increment Financing Act" means the statutory provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 - 469.179, inclusive, as amended. Q 2 3- J?? B. Statement of Public Puroose. The HRA has found that public interest requires the replanning and rehabilitation of residential and commercial neighborhoods across the City to remedy conditions of underutilized land, to correct numerous. traffic and pedestrian hazards, to improve substandard and unsafe housing units, to increase the property tax base, to increase employment, and to encourage the expansion of private enterprise. To these ends, the HRA and. the Council from 1975 to 1990 established and modified from time to time six individual Redevelopment Project Areas to enhance the public interest and accomplish goals and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plans. Given the geographical separation of the Redevelopment Project Areas, the HRA finds cause to explore opportunities to more effectively address the public interest. These opportunities include developing a more efficient method of financing public costs and assisting in the development and redevelopment by private enterprise unimpeded by individual Redevelopment Project Areas' boundaries. The HRA finds that it is necessary to facilitate the flow of funds into areas of the City which are in need of public intervention but previously had little or no resources available. The HRA has also determined that there exists areas of the City not included in one of the Redevelopment Project Areas in which needs are not being served and for which funds are not currently available. These areas include buildings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use, or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals or welfare of the City. The HRA has further determined that the welfare of the City requires active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce through government action for the purpose of preventing the emergence of blight and the occurrence of conditions requiring redevelopment. Therefore, the HRA has determined that the it is necessary to establish the Richfield Project Area which would encompass existing Redevelopment Project Areas as well as include portions of the City previously not included. Funds for redevelopment and development could therefore be targeted to specific needs without geographical barriers. Potential funding sources include, but are not limited to, tax increments, federal grants and loans, state grants and loans, interest earnings, land sale proceeds, development accounts, and other local resources. The establishment of the Richfield Project Area does not replace the existing Redevelopment Areas, does not include the establishment of a new tax increment financing district, nor does it extend the duration of existing Tax Increment Financing Districts. Instead, the establishment of the Richfield Project Area will serve as an umbrella entity. Therefore, costs of financing redevelopment activities will be reduced and areas of the City previously outside the HRA's area of operation will be included. 0 3 ? , 1 (0 C. Statutory Authority The statutory authority for the undertaking of a redevelopment project and the activities proposed in the redevelopment plan relating thereto is conferred upon the HRA pursuant to and in accordance with the HRA Act. Specifically, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.027 . establishes the requirements for the redevelopment plan preparation by an HRA prior to the undertaking of property acquisition, redevelopment, development and other related improvements. D. Statement of Goals and Objectives. The HRA determines that the establishment of the Richfield Project Area and the modification of Redevelopment Project Areas and Tax Increment Financing Districts will provide the HRA with the ability to achieve certain public purpose objectives not otherwise obtainable in the foreseeable future without HRA intervention in the normal development process. The HRA and Council seek to achieve the following goals and objectives: Goals: 1. To provide a revenue base to meet the needs of Richfield. 2. To develop job opportunities for area residents. 3. To develop strategies to encourage revitalization. 0 4. To maintain a positive business environment. 5. To enrich the quality of life for residents through planning of the interrelationship of land use. 6. To recognize the needs of all segments of the populace through diversity in housing stock which is a major determinant of the living environment. Objectives: 1. To achieve a high level of design quality through use of design features such as landscaping to enhance the physical environment. 2. To better utilize vacant or underdeveloped land. 3. To improve vehicular circulation by providing a comprehensive system which provides good direct access to and from the commercial areas. To the extent practical, eliminate commercial traffic from residential streets and minimize vehicular circulation conflicts or congestion. 4. To achieve a balanced variety of commercial businesses. and services appropriate to the market area. 5. To provide increased employment opportunities. 0 4 5-1-7 6. To diversify the tax base of the community. 7. To eliminate or reduce the conflicts which result from incompatible land use relationships, especially between residential and non-residential. 8. To protect the single-family residences from the adverse effects of nearby commercial development, roadways and off-street parking. 1 9. To utilize landscaping and/or screening between all single-family residential and commercial/office uses. Landscaping and/or screening should also be provided along major thoroughfares which border residential areas. 10. To eliminate unsightly and blighting elements such as exposed trash storage areas, overhead utility lines, poorly maintained and excessively large billboards or signs, and deteriorated structures. 11. To provide for the elimination of blight which is evidenced by irregular sized lots, inadequate streets, incompatible land uses, physical and functional obsolescence, and inadequate parking. 12. To encourage the sharing of parking facilities and to generally improve the parking and circulation in the area. 13. To provide public utilities and other public facilities of sufficient quality and size • to support the future development in the area. 14. To provide for an expanded range of housing opportunities in the community, as appropriate. 15. To encourage open lines of communication between all the residents, businesses and city staff. 16. To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the city for development by private enterprise. 17. - To coordinate elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan with these project objectives. 18. Provide jobs within close proximity of the residential population and concurrently saving energy by reducing trip time to jobs. 19. Provide a retail service level required by the residents of the community. 20. Secure the increase of housing, commercial, and industrial property subject to taxation by the City, Independent School District No. 280, Intermediate School District No. 287, Hennepin County, City, and other taxing jurisdictions in -order to better enable such entities to pay for governmental services and programs required to be provided by them. 0 5 3-)9 21. Encourage local business expansion, improvements, rehabilitation, and development, whenever possible and provide financial incentives for same. 22. Combine the elements of other City Plans with these project objectives. E. Estimated Public Costs. The anticipated public development activities in the Richfield Project Area to be undertaken by the HRA and City in order to support the private development activities include: 1. Property acquisition; 2. Site clearance; 3. Site improvements; 4. Activities in support of streetscape improvements; 5. Rehabilitation and renovation; 6. Public infrastructure improvements; 7. Parking facilities; • B. Right-of-way improvements; 9. Vacation of right-of-ways; and 10. Dedication of new right-of ways. The establishment of Richfield Project Area does not concurrently include the establishment of a new tax increment financing district. Budgets for tax increments contained within the Tax Increment Financing Plans will be utilized for any current expenditures. The establishment of Richfield Project Area is intended to authorize the HRA to expend tax increments derived from the Tax Increment Financing Districts on any property within the Richfield Project Area. Revenue other than tax increments to be expended in the Richfield Project Area will be designated in the annual HRA appropriation and budget process. Because the establishment of the Richfield Project Area is not expected to increase the captured tax capacity of the Tax Increment Financing Districts beyond the scope of the Tax Increment Financing Districts, as modified, the impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0 at this time. The HRA is not requesting new authority to issue bonds at this time. If bonds are issued according to the Tax Increment Financing Plans, tax increments from each of the Tax Increment Financing Districts may be used for credit enhancement or for payment of debt service on the bonds. Administrative costs will be funded as revenue sources become available and out of existing balances. 9 6 F. Boundary of the Richfield Project Area. s-?9 • The map and description for the boundary for the Richfield Project Area is found in Appendix A. A map outlining the boundary of the Project Area, the Redevelopment Project Areas, and the Tax Increment Financing Districts is found in Appendix B. The HRA is intending to expend tax increment in any parcel or right-of-way located within or is a portion of the Richfield Project Area boundary. G. Parcels in Acouisition and Relocation. The HRA may acquire and reconvey the parcels identified in Redevelopment Plans and Tax Increment Financing Plans. The HRA may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives. No additional parcels have been added to the list of properties to be acquired. The HRA accepts as binding its obligations under federal and state law for relocation and will administer relocation services for families, individuals and businesses to be displaced by public action if such services are requested or necessary. Prior to approval by the HRA of any development or development plan, it shall be satisfied that there is a feasible method for the temporary relocation of families and businesses to be displaced and that there are available or will be provided, in the project area or in other areas not less desirable in regard to public utilities and public commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means of the families and businesses displaced from the project area, decent, safe and sanitary residences and buildings equal in number of such displaced families and businesses. H. Environmental Considerations. Prior to development and substantial financing of the public costs associated with the project, the HRA will have secured the necessary review of the Project by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Environmental Quality Council, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and any other state, federal or local agencies and received the necessary permits or approvals from the affected agencies at the federal, state, and local levels of government, if such review and approval are identified as necessary by the HRA. 1. Proposed Land Use. Property reused in the Richfield Project Area that is in a Tax Increment Financing District will continue to be governed. by the Tax Increment Financing Plan as well as by the Comprehensive Plan. Land reuse outside a Tax Increment Financing District but within Richfield Project Area will be governed by the Comprehensive Plan, including any changes that are made thereto. The public improvements needed to bring about the new development or redevelopment any activities listed in Section E, "Estimated Public Costs", of this document. • 7 ?-ao J. Development Activity in Richfield Project Area. Any and all proposals by developers will be reviewed by the HRA and City, when appropriate, to determine conformance with the redevelopment plan and applicable municipal ordinances and codes. Property acquired by the HRA will be subject to a contract for sale upon disposition to the developer. The general requirements to be imposed upon the developer by the contract for sale are: 1. To redevelop the property purchased in accordance with this redevelopment plan; 2. To commence and complete the construction of improvements on the property within specified periods of time; 3. Not to resell the property before improvements are made without the prior consent of the HRA; and 4. Not to discriminate on the basis.of age, race, color, sex, sexual preference, creed, or national origin on the sale, lease, transfer, or occupancy of the property purchased from the HRA. Description of Private Development Activities The private development activities within the Richfield Project Area which are anticipated to • occur include: 1. Property acquisition; 2. Site clearance; 3. Site improvements; 4. Activities in support of streetscape improvements; 5. Rehabilitation and renovation; 6. New construction; 7. Public infrastructure improvements; 8. Parking facilities; 9. Right-of-way improvements; 10. Vacation of right-of-ways; and 11. Dedication of new right-of-ways. i 8 3-C)l K. Administration and Maintenance of Richfield Proiect Area • Maintenance and operation of the public improvements will be the responsibility of the Executive Director of the HRA. Each.year the Administrator will submit to the HRA the maintenance and. operation budget for the following year and will submit the necessary documents to the appropriate state agencies. No action taken by the Administrator pursuant to the above mentioned powers shall be effective without authorization by the HRA. L. Modification to the Richfield Proiect Area. All redevelopment plan modifications will be processed in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.029, Subdivision 6. L? 0 9 ? , aa Modification #7 to LHN Commercial Improvement Program • for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the LHN Commercial Improvement Program for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modified Commercial Improvement Program represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Program. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and the Commercial Improvement Program for the LHN Redevelopment Project Area originally dated October 15, 1975 and last modified on December 17, 1990 is recommended. Statutory Authority Statement See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Mar) of Project Area. List of Parcels, and Legal Description • The boundary for LHN Redevelopment Project Area is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Public Purr)ose Statement See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Public Costs and Financing This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the LHN Redevelopment Project Area for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. 10 g.':)_3 Modification #3 to Redevelopment Plan for ILN Redevelopment Project Area 0 and Modification #3 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for ILN Tax Increment Financing District June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modifications to the ILN Redevelopment Plan and ILN Tax Increment Financing Plan represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. In addition, a reduction in the original net tax capacity of ILN Tax Increment Financing District is contemplated in this modification through the reduction in the size of the tax increment financing district. Because the original net tax capacity of the parcel is higher than the current tax capacity, the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment is being formally modified. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and the Redevelopment Plan for the ILN Redevelopment • Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District dated October 21, 1985 and September 18, 1989 is recommended. Modification No. 3 Redevelopment Plan for ILN Redevelopment Project Area Statutory Authority Statement See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Map of Project Area. List of Parcels, and Legal Description The boundary for ILN Redevelopment Project Area is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Public Purpose Statement See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of.the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. • 11 S -pq statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Modification No. 3 Tax Increment Financing Plan for ILN Tax Increment Financing District Statement of Goals and Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. Estimated Project Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the ILN Tax Increment Financing District for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. Proaerties to be Included in the Tax Increment Financing District • Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 4, the Tax Increment Financing Plan is being modified to reduce the geographic area of the tax increment financing district. The parcel to be eliminated has a current net tax capacity of 882,900 and an original net tax capacity of 8179,850 for taxes payable in 1993. Because the original net tax capacity exceeds the current net tax capacity, the tax increment financing plan is being modified to reflect a reduction in the original net tax capacity of the ILN Tax Increment Financing District. The amount of annual tax increment contemplated in the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the ILN Tax Increment Financing District was approximately 82,211,000. Because the tax increment generated from the ILN Tax Increment District in 1993 is expected to be substantially less than originally disclosed in the tax increment financing plan (approximately 8200,000 in tax increment prior to the removal of the parcel and approximately 8325,000 in tax increment after the reduction in the original net tax capacity), no additional impacts upon other taxing jurisdictions is contemplated in this modification. The parcel to be eliminated from the ILN Tax Increment Financing District is listed below: Parcel ID # 33-028-24-43-0019 The Executive Director of the HRA is authorized to notify the county auditor of the modification to the original net tax capacity of the ILN Tax Increment Financing District. • 12 g -as Modification #2 to Redevelopment Plan for CABA Redevelopment Project Area and Modification #2 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for CABA Tax Increment Financing District June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the CABA Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the CABA Tax Increment Financing District to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modified Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and the Redevelopment Plan for the CABA Redevelopment Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the CABA Tax Increment Financing District dated January 19, 1988 is recommended. • Modification No. 2 Redevelopment Plan for CABA Redevelopment Proiect Area A. Statement of Public Purpose See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. C. Description of the Redevelopment Project Area The boundary for CABA Redevelopment Project Area is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. D. Statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. 0 13 ?' ? (P Modification No. 2 Tax Increment Financing Plan for CABA Tax Increment Financing District A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the CABA Tax Increment Financing District for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. C? 0 14 8-a?) Modification #1 to Redevelopment Plan for PASSS Redevelopment Project Area • and Modification #1 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for PASSS Tax Increment Financing District June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modified Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plan. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and the Redevelopment Plan for the PASSS Redevelopment Project Area and Tax Increment Financing Plan for the PASSS Tax Increment Financing District dated December 19, 1989 is recommended. • Modification No. 1 Redevelopment Plan for PASSS Redevelopment Proiect Area A. Statement of Public Purpose See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. C. Description of the Redevelopment Project Area The boundary for PASSS Redevelopment Project Area is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. D. Statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be' found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project.Area, dated June 14, 1993. 0 . 15 g-ag Modification No. 1 Tax Increment Financing Plan for PASSS Tax Increment Financina District A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the. PASSS Tax Increment Financing District for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. 0 0 16 9-a5 Modification #2 to Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A 0 and Modification #2 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-1 and Modification #1 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-2 June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-2 to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modified Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plans represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plans. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing District A-1 and Tax Increment Financing District A-2 dated July 16, 1990 and July 20, 1992 is recommended. Modification No. 2 Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area A A. Statement of Public Purpose See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. C. Description of the Redevelopment Project Area The boundary for Redevelopment Project Area A is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. D. Statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. 17 8 3° Modification No. 2 Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-1 A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993: B. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the Tax Increment Financing District A-1 for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. W. Restrictions of Pooling Tax increments generated from Tax Increment Financing District A-1 may be expended outside the boundary of Tax Increment Financing District A-1 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.1763 and 469.175, Subdivision 8. 18 9-3) Modification No. 1 Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District A-2 A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from Tax Increment Financing District A-2 for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. W. Restrictions of Pooling Tax increments generated from Tax Increment Financing District A-2 may be expended • outside the boundary of Tax Increment Financing District A-2 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.1763 and 469.175, Subdivision 8. 9 19 Modification #2 to Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B and Modification #2 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-1 and Modification #1 to Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-2 June 14, 1993 Introduction The following text represents a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-2 to include references to the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. The modified Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plans represent a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the original Redevelopment Plan and Tax Increment Financing Plans. Generally, the substantive changes include the authority to spend tax increments generated from any of the HRA's eight tax increment financing districts in the Richfield Redevelopment Project Area. For further information, a review of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area dated June 14, 1993 and . the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project Area B and Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing District B-1 and Tax Increment Financing District B-2 dated July 16, 1990 and July 20, 1992 is recommended. Modification No. 2 Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Proiect Area B A. Statement of Public Purpose See also the Statement of Public Purpose found in Section B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 19.93. B. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. C. Description of the Redevelopment Project Area The boundary for Redevelopment Project Area B is not being modified. References to the area in which tax increments may be expended can be found Appendix A and Appendix B of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. D. Statement of Goals and Objectives Additional goals and objectives can be found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. 20 8 33 Modification No. 2 Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financings District B-1 A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. B. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from Tax Increment Financing District B-1 for qualified activities identified in the budget of any of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. W. Restrictions of Pooling Tax increments generated from Tax Increment Financing District B-1 may be expended outside the boundary of Tax Increment Financing District B-1 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, • Sections 469.1763 and 469.175, Subdivision 8. 0 21 Modification No. 1 Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District B-2 A. Statutory Authority See also the Statutory Authority found in Section C of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. 6. Statement of Objectives See also the Statement of Goals and Objectives found in Section D of the Redevelopment Plan for Richfield Redevelopment Project Area, dated June 14, 1993. G. Estimate of Costs This modification authorizes the HRA to expend tax increment from the CABA Tax Increment Financing District B-2 for qualified activities identified in the budget of any. of the Tax Increment Financing Districts. W. Restrictions of Pooling Tax increments generated from Tax Increment Financing District B-2 may be expended outside • the boundary of Tax Increment Financing District B-2 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.1763 and 469.175, Subdivision 8. 9 22 8 3s" . APPENDIX A MAP AND DESCRIPTION OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA 0 A-1 • a Z D O m a Q H Q W O 5 cc Z a Iiiiiiii, Q W 2 CL OJ 0 X 0 W U 5-3b a- 1~11 H ? ? N N M = .?- - Nslarlrls _ ??? n ~ =z rYZ2 L. ?? __Jl 1 I \ \ ?a 11. Uv W 1o 1= I N `Yf 111 N N N N_ W 16661 01110T13lONO-I _ _ MOll3lONOl 3A• Yr030 at•- - AV tlr030 YI •I ` ???OO .._ Y101 VIII ? oooo?oD o?o? -- ""' NOlONIN001B NO19NINOOIY NI SI Yl fl ??OOOLr..J IT__J1O? ?O Y1 f1 oo??ooooro-j0o aoo? Yf zl O??O????l-JO ?OI?O YI ZI C?C]? ? ODOO?O ., _ oooaooooo0 0' 101113 i, ; W ?oooo?o ?o? Ii 101113 OOVDINO moo I OOO?OOODO? ?; OO.OINO sntNMyid I , ?00??00??0 i mo° Ytlrd atlrlX•0I i _ ????0000?? ? atlrlX•o inn r O?DOOODC?00 3A• ON•l1YOd A• ONruYOe 00 oao MIS Ylf I -- --- OC?B !?I BQ?? Ylf NOiN11O NO1N110 „t Oo 000000800 -- .,S E:9 .Y= 0 D OBBL-i ,"Z f N3A31f C?? OOB?=OO? SM3A31S III N 3A• 1311031N '7n• 131103I O D 113051•li II ? ?? `~. EEE?B?pzz?O ?I 1130SIrlY N1tlOM1N300i III ?O ?OOOODI NllOM143101 AdnY5111d Awrismld III ?? OO? I ^-a 1N•SV31d Dl_ 1-,. ) i._.1. 1Nrsr3ld ONrY9 I `-\J ?Ir^-?II7?II !`1IIu11? °N•YO 131 YY•N II r ~ F__7 lI 131tlYtN 0131ltlr9 II I ??? ®B?? OD O131l YrO "3A• 31.ONAl 3i \ '3A• 3l•ONAI NOIYOI• `\??:,J OOB?? NOIYOIr v ??? III""''II 1N•AtlY ?I? r a?O?OII 1N•AY0 X•!100 II, - xvilm 1140dn0 ?\ J I p Y a?O?O 1NOdn0 0 ?0? NOSY)N7 NOSY3N? it iNOINAU iNOFGU Otlr111O OY•YIO IOIOYNnN 10109nnN ONIAtlI ONIAVI S3nVr %ON% O?O?JF DOCIO I - ` x NVDOI N•9Y0wL??UC?C? I lO? Nr OYON NO1M3N OO?? ?`-'?OO I?O ! NO1M3N Y3AIl0 HEF Y3AllO '3A• MN 3d - '3A• MN3d N33n0 N33n0 1135Sntl i" ? ??^ ?, II 1135SnY N•OlY3NS ILA 113ssN5 SWROW1 Li NOldn __jLl NSTRON1 ?c I ??? ??? J?? Oldn 1N30NIA -_ 71??L?? ?I Imo` =11 iN30NIA NYnBMf•M I C? -II- ??©?(_JI I (u r- 11 I NYnYN$•M _?- ?? ?M N N N N N N N. N N N N N N N N N N Np N N g. A-2 8,3? Legal Description of Richfield Redevelopment Project Area Boundary Starting at the intersection of the Richfield west city line and 66th Street, following east on 66th Street to Queen Avenue, thence north to 65th Street, thence west to the rear lot lines of the properties on th e east side of Russell Avenue, thence north on said rear property lines to the north city line, thence east to Lyndale Avenue, thence south to 63rd Street, thence east to Harriet Avenue, thence south to 64 1/2 Street, thence continuing south on the property line between Lots 4 and 5, Block 6, Lyndale Oaks Subdivision to the south line of said subdivision, which is also the north line of Hauser's Second Addition. Thence continuing east on said line and as extended to Pillsbury Avenue, thence north on Pillsbury Avenue to the south line of Block 6, Rearrangement of Nicollet Homes Second Addition, thence east on said line to the rear lot line of the lots in Block 8 of said addition, between Blaisdell and Nicollet Avenues, thence north on said line to 64th Street, thence east on 64th Street to. the rear lot line of the lots in Block 8, Town's Edge Subdivision, thence south to 65th Street, following the east edge of First Federal Richfield Addition. Thence continuing east on 65th Street to First Avenue, thence south to 66th Street, thence east to 11th Avenue, thence north to the north city line, thence east to Bloomington Avenue, thence south to 63rd Street, thence east to 16th Avenue, thence south to the south border of Taft Park, thence east to 18th Avenue, thence south to the intersection of the northerly lot line of Lot 10, Block 1, Wexler's Addition and 18th Avenue South, thence in a line along said northerly lot line as extended to the west right-of-way line of Cedar Avenue, thence north to a point 55 feet south of the centerline of 66th Street, thence east to a point 110 feet east of the centerline of Cedar Avenue, thence south to the easterly extension of the south line of Lot 1, Block 4, Wexler's Addition, thence west along said line to the west line of said lot, thence north to the south right-of-way line of vacated 67th Street. Thence west to 18th Avenue, thence south to Diagonal Boulevard, thence east along the centerline of said boulevard, extended to T.H. 77, thence south to the south city line, thence west to Interstate 35W, thence north to 73rd street, thence west to Penn Avenue, thence south to 74th Street, thence west to Sheridan Avenue, thence south to 76th Street, thence east to Penn Avenue, thence south to the north Frontage Road of Interstate I-494, thence west to Thomas Avenue, thence north to 77th Street, thence east to the west right of way line of Sheridan Avenue, thence north to 76th Street, thence west to the west city line, thence north to the point of beginning at 66th Street.. 0 A-3 APPENDIX B MAP OF RICHFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS • 6-1 m x 0 z a • C PA is Nf10Nta4 N 77 N14 1104 1141 Q A10117/4N0'1 _ 7M Yt070 z '4401 11a1 Q 11 f1' W in Z N "04.9011 444 1/r W W Q W Q v_ ? IMOO, Q .111 aom7 ' O4t011q IIYN ONt1rt0 O JAW Ow4'LMM , CL U Z 1/f ' N• NOlMnO W V ••f N7 fN7AUt • W ? a ? MI JAY aT,001N 1170f1t14 ? I I a LL N1YO?1N7J1 ?1 t H r ANn4417I III O J ? W ? Z W 1Ntft7,. .q# oNtw Iii 17tYY1M I 0,71/YH I'ii " W Q a J 5 iN W 7A. 71HNA1 NOlrO,t IM.Aw I; Yt/,00 cc Q J W ? w / W W U Z - / ((Q`?? r 1wWn0 NOfr)N] 1NO101J 4rtrlf 10104wnN 4NIAr1 Llwtr 30Nr - Nt00, V NtfYOw - NOlN7N »» _ _ _ ? I 39: .o? m= Z6 t- s z \ u V i y ? W p a ?1Zyy Z`. . ? ? • W ???1wNY???{{{ AIO„]JDNOt 3W WWQ" ? • •• 7719 000 '1 IalfNlwo014 ?? ? r141 9 < ? : • 0?? u fl eo 3 : ? ? •••••• OOC? x171 ? ? ; ? '•'•'• ODD rl 11 ? V I OI /?/O 3 ... ??? i 1011,) y? ?" ... ??? OOt71N0 3 0 ? ?:; ODD ? sn4wn,oa o ? "? ? :: DOS ?? NrN Q ONtlllp a? • M JAt oolvuw w ow M of ? rl? ? V Q I P ? MO1NI77 A? w _- ?a f fly N7 ii f«7Au4 7 .... JAW 171,oa1N E CL c ?.?j••.?••;•? .:. 1 MUO?1N7? ? C '?i'K't•? .' .'...'... - ? 1Ntft71J ? ? ::•: o,31JYH Gal JAW 31TaftA1 N71rOlt 0 V i '• 1NtAw ¦tJ1w Z r 7At NN7/ '? ,„ r ftwONl NOl/n r ' 3AV Mon4NitA1 I mix ?» G »? » » k? » » » »....G ».•.•.•.» s .2 -C g ? CC H B-2 I v •` OWIArl t)wtr XONY ; I7 N 01 "110w Or .."Now IuI N01N7N r3Atl0 ']A1 011131 N37n0 1 „7ssnr M • NIOIN)N1 ftwOMa II NOl/n LN3]NIA `IT+1;11 JAW f3YY]k w i 1 y 1 i • COUNCIL POLICIES WHEN ISSUING TAX INCREMENT BONDS 1. The multi-family project, home improvement center, Richfield Bank,and Trust project and promotional department store project be completed by separate developers. 2. The bond issue should be divided into stages. 3. Surety bonds for project completion must be retained from each developer. • 4. Bonds must not be sold or land assembled until a definite financial ccmmitment is obtained from the developer. 5. Speedy site assembly (property purchase relocation and demolition) must be completed by the HRA once a developer is committed.to the project. • =,add MP • 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599 City Manager Mayor Council James D. Prosser Martin Kirsch Don Priebe Michael Sandahl Susan Rosenberg Russ Susag THE DEVELOPMENT FUND The Met Council has described first ring suburbs as having "an aging and dwindling population, older housing with an uncertain future." Perhaps a more apt description is a city in transition. For Richfield to remain attractive and viable during this "transition" phase, the City must respond to these issues. The HRA has recently established a development fund to deal aggressively with community needs. Not only must Richfield remain attractive to its current residents and business people but it must attract new people who wish to live and work here. WHAT IS THE DEVELOPMENT FUND? The development fund can be used to establish new programs and fund existing programs administered by the HRA. Initially three programs are proposed. ? Apartment Management Program A focus of the 1990's must be the 5,000 apartments. Current residents of the apartments are more likely to require support services than previous residents. • Owners and managers need to become more effective in applying resources to maintenance, building updating and potential resident evaluation. A coordinated linkage system involving the city, landlords, managers, residents, and social service agencies is needed. ? Richfield Rediscovered With 27 sites under redevelopment, the impact of this two year old program is being felt throughout the community. Poor quality housing is being replaced by new contemporary housing. Neighbors are responding by making improvements to their property. The development fund can provide a reliable funding source to continue the momentum and maintain a market presence. There is both a readily available supply of sites suitable for redevelopment and a supply of potential buyers of new homes. ? Transformation Homes The number of FHANA foreclosed properties has increased in recent years. Often times they attract absentee owners as buyers. Under this program initiative the HRA would operate as a conduit purchasing the property and selling it at cost to a builder/developer who would make significant improvements to the property literally transforming it from market obsolete to updated high value homes. WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF FUNDING? • The funds would be available from the interest and land sale proceeds of existing tax increment projects. The funds are not tax revenues. The tax. revenue must be used to maintain and pay all debt service on the existing schedules. The Urban Hometown Telephone (612) 861-9700 Fax 861-9749 An Equal Opportunity Employer g-ya 0 WHAT WOULD A DEVELOPMENT FUND COST RICHFIELD TAXPAYERS? Returning development fund revenues to taxing jurisdictions or paying the bonds ahead of schedule would result in a savings of. $.17 for every $1.00 of returned money for Richfield city and school taxpayers. The primary beneficiaries would be Hennepin County and the fiscal disparities pool. For homesteaded property valued at $85,000 the tax savings is estimated at $3.32 per year. The utilization of a development fund has the effect of leveraging the funds that directly benefit Richfield. The housing initiatives outlined, as well as additional programs, will require funding outside of the operating budget if such are to be meaningful. The cost of initiating these programs outside of a development fund would require a tax of 5 to 6 times the yearly savings noted above for the average homeowner. While the establishment of a development fund is new to Richfield, other metropolitan area communities have had such a fund in operation for years. Brooklyn Park, for example is successfully utilizing such a fund in dealing with its aging apartment developments. WHAT FISCAL CONTROLS WILL EXIST FOR USE OF THE FUND? Fiscal consultants will review project cash flows and debt service needs on an annual basis prior to the transferring of any money to the development fund. Once transferred, funds will be expended only with HRA authorization. 0 n CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 172 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amending Section 840 of the City Code for regulation of public parks. Background: The ordinance regulates the hours parks are closed, defines which activities are permitted after closing and outlines a procedure for a permit which allows exception to the regulations. The proposed ordinance amendment retains the 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. hours when the parks are closed, adds the miniature golf course to the existing list of permitted activity, and would now have groups, associations and organizations wishing to sponsor an activity in a public park apply for a permit regardless of the time of day. This will avoid duplication of hours for scheduled activities, permit the City to better maintain facilities, and groups, associations and organizations will have a better understanding of when and where their programming activities may take place. Residents, groups, associations and organizations will be notified of any change in the ordinance through various publications such as the Richfield Sun/Current, Your City & Schools, Status and Information Report, quarterly brochure, cable television Bulletin Board, and the Park Pathways newsletter. • First reading of the proposed ordinance change was held May 10, 1993. Changes suggested by the Council in the proposed ordinance amendment have been incorporated for the second reading and public hearing. Recommended Motion: Conduct a public hearing and approve second reading of the ordinance amendment to Section 840 of the City Code. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The hours of 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. are reasonable for when the parks are closed. 2. When the Ice Arena has an opportunity to sell ice time during the hours the park is closed, the existing ordinance permits such extended hours. With the miniature golf course, it is possible that play may extend slightly beyond 11 p.m. if some players start late. Because of the miniature golf course location, there should be no disturbance to residents should the course be used for a short period after 11 p.m. 3. Sometimes a group, association or organization wishes to have an event during the hours parks are open. Because a permit is not currently required, the City is not always aware of • these activities. By expanding the permit system, there will be greater awareness of activities and improved opportunity to work with the groups, associations and organizations. ?-I 4. First reading was on May 10, 1993. Notice of the June 14, 1993 public hearing and second reading has been published. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not amend the park ordinance. However, this may cause continued confusion as to what activities are permitted in public parks and when. 2. Provide additional amendments to the park ordinance. However, this does not seem necessary at this time. Discussion/Decision Mode: The public hearing is scheduled for June 14, 1993. Second reading should be approved at that time, if the Council is satisfied with the proposed ordinance amendment, so that sufficient notice of changes may be provided during the busy 1993 summer season. ly submitted, JamekID. Prosser City anager • JDP:cak 0 ?-a • BILL NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 840 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD; REQUIRING PERMITS FOR ORGANIZED ACTIVITIES IN PUBLIC PARKS THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: I. Subsection 840.03 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 840.03. Activities permitted after closing. The following activities may continue in the public parks after the parks have closed: (a) use of the indoor ice arena and use of the miniature golf course; (b) city sponsored and supervised activities, which because of the nature of the activity, cannot be held during the time when the parks are open; (c) activities sponsored by any other group, association or organization which has applied for and received a permit for such activity pursuant to subsection 840.05; and (d) custodial or maintenance by city and Hennepin County authorized personnel who must perform their services during the times when the parks are closed. II. Subsection 840.05 of the Richfield City Code is amended to read as follows: 840.05. Permits. Subdivision 1. Prohibition. No person may engage in an organized activity in a public park unless the group, association or organization sponsoring the activity has obtained a permit as provided in this subsection. For purposes of this subsection, and "organized activity" means a planned recreational or sporting activity involving more than 10 persons that is sponsored by a group, association or organization, the time and location of which are advertised in advance of the activity to the group, association or organization members and which activity makes exclusive use of a portion or all of a public park. Examples of organized activities include, without limitation, class reunions, sporting tournaments or league sporting events. Subd. la. Procedure. A group, association or organization wishing to sponsor any organized activity whiah will use 1'arrs betw''eee-r?tY- the hours of 111.00 o'clock p.m. and 5:00 eleieek a.m shall apply to the city 7-3 manager or the manager's designee not less than ten ays two weeks before such planned organized activity for a permit to conduct the activity. The application shall be on forms prepared by the manager. Fees will be determined annually during the budget process. No permit may be issued unless the city manager determines that the proposed jaetivity- j (a) if the organized activity is proposed to use the park between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m., that the proposed activity could not be conducted during hours when the park is open to the public; (b) if the organized activity is proposed to use the park between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m., that the proposed activity will not be likely to disturb the residents of property surrounding the park; (c) that the proposed activity will not be likely to cause or create crowd control or traffic or park maintenance problems; and (d) that the proposed activity will not interfere with any other activities previously scheduled for the park. Subd.2. Activity: bond. The manager may limit the time of the organized activity, the area in the park where the organized activity will occur and may impose other conditions upon the conduct of the proposed activity. The manager may also require as a condition of issuance of the permit an indemnity bond holding the city harmless from liability of any kind or character and reimbursing the city for any property damage or cleanup cost. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota on , 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 11 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.171 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Public hearing and approval of second reading of an ordinance amending the Richfield City Charter regarding bond referendums. Background: The Charter Commission has recommended an amendment to the City Charter. The amendment would provide that prior to deciding whether to request voter approval of a bond referendum, the Council must conduct one public hearing proceeded by notice published in a newspaper. The purpose of the amendment would be to assure that adequate public notice is provided regarding a general obligation debt issue. Charter amendments may be adopted by the Council by an affirmative vote of all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment. An ordinance amending a city charter does not become effective until 90 days after passage and publication or at such later date as is fixed in the ordinance. First reading was conducted on May 10 and the public hearing and second reading were scheduled for June 14, 1993. Recommended Motion: Conduct the public hearing and approve second reading of this ordinance. Basis for Recommendation: 1. In order to gain public approval of debt offerings, it is important that adequate public notice be provided. 2. The City has routinely provided public notice for debt offerings. The Charter requirement is, therefore, not unusual or onerous. 3. It is sensible to provide adequate notice to the public prior to a bond referendum. 4. First reading was conducted on May 10 and the public hearing and second reading were scheduled for June 14, 1993. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may decide to request that the Charter amendment be submitted to voters for approval. 2. The Council may decide to recommend modifications to the charter and send the question back to the Charter Commission. Discussion/Decision Mode: The public hearing and second reading are scheduled for June 14, 1993. 7eD. ully submitted, Prosser ager 05/20/91., 12:47 HOLMES & GRAVEN NO.003 002 p. BILL NO. 1993- AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO CITY GOVERNMENT: AMENDING THE RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Background : Findings : Authority. 1.01. The City of Richfield (City) is governed by a home rule charter adopted November 3, 1964, pursuant to the Constitution of the state of Minnesota and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 410 (Act). 1.02. The Charter Commission of the City has proposed the adoption of an amendment (Amendment) of the City Charter ("Charter") and recommended to the City Council that the Amendment be adopted by City Council ordinance in the manner prescribed by Section 410.12, Subdivision 7 of the Act. The form of the amendment is set out in Section 2.02. 1.03. A public hearing on the Amendment was duly held on June 14, 1993, by the City Council after two weeks' published notice containing the text of the Amendment as required by the Act. The notice contained a brief description of the nature and scope of the Amendment. All persons desiring to be heard with reference to the Amendment were heard at the public hearing. 1.04. The Council finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the City and its inhabitants that the Amendment be adopted. Sec. 2. Adoption: Effective Date. 2.01. The Amendment, as proposed by the Commission, is adopted. 2.02. The text of the proposed amendment is as follows: 1. Chapter 7 of the Charter is amended : By amending Section 7.14 thereof to read as follows: Section 7.14. City Indebtedness. Except as provided in Sections 7.15 and 7.16, no obligations shall be issued to pay current expenses, but the Council may issue and sell obligations for any other municipal purpose in accordance with law and within the limitations prescribed by law. Except in the case of the obligations for which an election is not required by this Charter or by state law, no such obligations shall be issued or sold without the approval of the majority of the registered voters of the City voting on the question at a general or special election. Before submitting a question to the voters under this Section the Council must conduct at least one public hearin on the question receded b notice published in a news a er a selected by the Council not more than 28 days nor less than 14 days prior to JED52559 RC140-1 e5/20/97 12:48 HOLMES & GRAVEN NO.003 003 Va- See. 2.03. This ordinance is effective ninety (90) days after its publication, except that if within sixty (50) days after publication a petition requesting a referendum on this ordinance, signed by the number of registered voters of the City required by the Act is filed with the City Clerk, this ordinance will not be effective until approved by 51% of the voters voting' on the question of its adoption at the special election called by the Council for that purpose. Sec. 2.04. On the effective date of the Amendment the City Clerk is authorized and directed to file copies of the Amendment with the Secretary of State of the State of Minnesota, the Hennepin County Recorder, and in the City Clerk's office, together with the certificate required by Section 410.11 of the Act. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1983. ATTEST: martini. Kirsch, Mayor Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 J=5253a =60-1 2 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 170 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration of a request for a new 1993 auto detailing license for Sunset Auto Detail, 904 West 77h Street. Background: On June 1, 1993, the City received the new application and other required documents for the auto detailing license for Sunset Auto Detail. The applicant has paid the required license fee. Recommended Motion: Approve the issuance of a new 1993 auto detailing license'for Sunset Auto Detail. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of City codes and has paid the required licensing fee. 2. Based upon the information supplied by the applicant, there appears to be no reason to deny the license requested. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide not to approve the license application requested. This would mean that Sunset Auto Detail would be unable to operate their business at this location. Discussion/Decision Mode: Recommendation to approve the application for a auto detailing license for Sunset Auto Detail, 904 West 77h Street, is being presented to Council at this time. Respect ully submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP:ds 51 CITY OF RICHFIELD Council Letter No. 169 Agenda June, 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Purchase in excess of $5,000 for new light fixtures over the ice at the Ice Arena. 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 flourescent lighting fixtures at the Ice Arena are original. They are deteriorated and have less reflective capability than when new. The lamps are very high output, expensive to operate and require regular changing. The new fixtures would be bi-level metal halide fixtures. The cost to operate will be about 40% less than the existing system and require less maintenance. The purchase of the fixtures would`be financed by NSP. It would include a rebate. The City would continue to pay our current monthly electric charges. The difference in actual usage would . pay off NSP. There is no capital cost outlay to the arena. There are three quotes for the fixtures required: Sterling Electric $12,932.00 840.58 tax Total $13,772.58 Judd Supply Company $13,000.00 845.00 tax Total $13,845.00 EESCO United $13,150.00 854.75 tax Total $14,004.75 Cardinal Electric $13,300.00 864.50 tax Total $14,164.50 Recommended Motion: Approve a purchase order in the amount of $13,772.58 to Sterling Electric for bi-level metal halide light fixtures to be used at the Richfield Ice Arena. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Sterling Electric submitted the lowest quote for the fixtures requested. 5T- I 2. Sterling Electric has been a dependable vendor in the delivery of supplies. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not improve the lighting over the ice sheet at the Ice Arena. However, this does not seem to be in the best interests of the Ice Arena nor its users. 2. Purchase the new lighting fixtures from another vendor. However, this would be more costly. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is on the consent calendar of the June 14, 1993 Council agenda. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City M Yager JDP:ds 0 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No.168 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Approval of resolution declaring costs to be assessed for removal of diseased trees from private property for the period January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, and approval of resolution setting date of hearing. Background: The costs to be assessed for the removal of Dutch Elm diseased trees on private property for the period of January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992 have been determined to be $37,994.70. The property owner of a diseased tree has four options available: 1. Remove the tree themselves. 2. Hire and pay their own contractor. 3. Hire the City's contractor and pay for the removal within 30 days, or 4. Use the City's contractor and request that the cost of • the tree removal be assessed against their property tax. In the period from January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, 56 property owners chose the fourth option. The original source of funding to have the work completed is through the City's Permanent Improvement Revolving (PIR) Fund. The property owner may prepay the special assessment, but if it is certified on or before October 10, 1993, for the 1993 taxes, the interest rate is eight percent with payment spread over three years. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll, and adopt the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The work has been completed with prior approval from the affected residents. 2. Minnesota State Statute requires the County to be notified of all special assessments. Alternative Recommendation: • Council may revise the special assessment roll as deemed necessary following the public hearing. 5N- I . Discussion/Decision Mode: All work was performed with prior approval from home owners. Staff is requesting adoption of the attached resolutions at this time in order to meet certification deadlines. Respectf ly submitted, James Prosser City nager JDP:ds Attachments • 514d- 0 • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1992 TO DECEMBER 31, 1992. WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the removal of diseased trees from the following private properties in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such work during the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992 amount to $37,994.70. Property Address 7432 Upton Avenue 7116 Lyndale Avenue 7123 Oak Grove Boulevard 6528 Girard Avenue 6405 Humboldt Avenue 7200 Chicago Avenue 400 West 64th Street 6606 Oliver Avenue 7128 Stevens Avenue 6633 Lynwood Boulevard 6629 Lynwood Boulevard 7109 Oak Grove Boulevard 6900-18th Avenue 7033 Fourth Avenue 6511 Knox Avenue 6904 Upton Avenue 500 East 67th Street 7433 Washburn Avenue 1407 West 68th Street 7108 Lyndale Avenue 7039 Oliver Avenue 6638-11th Avenue 7600 Clinton Avenue 6732-16th Avenue 7141 Oak Grove Boulevard 6500-22nd Avenue 6439-13th Avenue 6612 Oakland Avenue 7005 Penn Avenue 6812 Emerson Lane 7509 Fremont Avenue 6341 Longfellow Avenue 7233 Russell Avenue 6529-19th Avenue 6525-20th Avenue 7037 Oakland Avenue 6229 Garfield Avenue 6725 Penn Avenue 6625 Stevens Avenue 6501-14th Avenue Property Identification Number 32-02824-42-0038 33-02824-11-0020 33-02824-14-0092 28-02824-13-0040 28-02824-13-0021 35-02824-23-0113 27-02824-22-0075 28-02824-32-0055 34-02824-12-0076 28-02824-41-0032 28-02824-41-0031 33-02824-11-0021 26-02824-44-0081 34-02824-11-0099 28-02824-24-0109 29-02824-43-0143 27-02824-41-0013 32-02824-42-0059 28-02824-43-0012 33-02824-11-0019 33-02824-22-0046 26-02824-31-0022 34-02824-44-0019 26-02824-41-0042 33-02824-14-0090 25-02824-24-0014 26-02824-13-0125 27-02824-32-0035 33-02824-22-0064 28-02824-42-0090 33-02824-42-0114 25-02824-22-0017 32-02824-14-0032 25-02824-23-0035 25-02824-23-0050 35-02824-22-0042 27-02824-22-0067 28-02824-32-0076 27-02824-42-0095 26-02824-13-0094 5N3 Property Address 6700-16th Avenue 6520-23rd Avenue 6916 Thomas Avenue 7033 Garfield Avenue 6608 Second Avenue 7235 Bloomington Avenue 6629 Knox Avenue 6635 Knox Avenue 7250 Oak Grove Boulevard 2720 West 66th Street 6835 Longfellow Avenue 7312 Wentworth Avenue 7424 Fifth Avenue 7208 Knox Avenue 6600 Second Avenue 6236 Bloomington Avenue Property Identification Number 26-02824-41-0037 25-02824-24-0117 29-02824-43-0170 34-02824-22-0014 27-02824-42-0067 35-02824-14-0035 28-02824-31-0034 28-02824-31-0035 33-02824-14-0117 29-02824-13-0030 25-02824-33-0048 34-02824-24-0075 34-02824-41-0038 33-02824-24-0013 27-02824-42-0116 26-02824-12-0049 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The total cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $37,994.70. 2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper • amount to be specially assessed for such work against each benefited property, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 14th day of June, 1993. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch Mayor 9 5H4 • C: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1992 TO DECEMBER 31, 1992. WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 14, 1993, the City Clerk was directed to prepare the assessment of the cost of removing diseased trees from the following private properties in the City of Richfield for the period January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. Property Address 7432 Upton Avenue 7116 Lyndale Avenue 7123 Oak Grove Boulevard 6528 Girard Avenue 6405 Humboldt Avenue 7200 Chicago Avenue 400 West 64th Street 6606 Oliver Avenue 7128 Stevens Avenue 6633 Lynwood Boulevard 6629 Lynwood Boulevard 7109 Oak Grove Boulevard 6900-18th Avenue 7033 Fourth Avenue 6511 Knox Avenue 6904 Upton Avenue 500 East 67th Street 7433 Washburn Avenue 1407 West 68th Street 7108 Lyndale Avenue 7039 Oliver Avenue 6638-11th Avenue 7600 Clinton Avenue 6732-16th Avenue 7141 Oak Grove Boulevard 6500-22nd Avenue 6439-13th Avenue 6612 Oakland Avenue 7005 Penn Avenue 6812 Emerson Lane 7509 Fremont Avenue 6341 Longfellow Avenue 7233 Russell Avenue 6529-19th Avenue 6525-20th Avenue 7037 Oakland Avenue 6229 Garfield Avenue 6725 Penn Avenue 6625 Stevens Avenue 6501-14th Avenue 6700-16th Avenue Property Identification Number 32-02824-42-0038 33-02824-11-0020 33-02824-14-0092 28-02824-13-0040 28-02824-13-0021 35-02824-23-0113 27-02824-22-0075 28-02824-32-0055 34-02824-12-0076 28-02824-41-0032 28-02824-41-0031 33-02824-11-0021 26-02824-44-0081 34-02824-11-0099 28-02824-24-0109 29-02824-43-0143 27-02824-41-0013 32-02824-42-0059 28-02824-43-0012 33-02824-11-0019 33-02824-22-0046 26-02824-31-0022 34-02824-44-0019 26-02824-41-0042 33-02824-14-0090 25-02824-24-0014 26-02824-13-0125 27-02824-32-0035 33-02824-22-0064 28-02824-42-0090 33-02824-42-0114 25-02824-22-0017 32-02824-14-0032 25-02824-23-0035 25-02824-23-0050 35-02824-22-0042 27-02824-22-0067 28-02824-32-0076 27-02824-42-0095 26-02824-13-0094 26-02824-41-0037 5H-5 Property Address 6520-23rd Avenue 6916 Thomas Avenue 7033 Garfield Avenue 6608 Second Avenue 7235 Bloomington Avenue 6629 Knox Avenue 6635 Knox Avenue 7250 Oak Grove Boulevard 2720 West 66th Street 6835 Longfellow Avenue 7312 Wentworth Avenue 7424 Fifth Avenue 7208 Knox Avenue 6600 Second Avenue 6236 Bloomington Avenue Property Identification Number 25-02824-24-0117 29-02824-43-0170 34-02824-22-0014 27-02824-42-0067 35-02824-14-0035 28-02824-31-0034 28-02824-31-0035 33-02824-14-0117 29-02824-13-0030 25-02824-33-0048 34-02824-24-0075 34-02824-41-0038 33-02824-24-0013 27-02824-42-0116 26-02824-12-0049 WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: . 1. A hearing shall be held on the 26th day of July, 1993, in the City Hall Council Chambers at.7 p.m., or as soon as is hereafter as it may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said diseased tree removal assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to'cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the Clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the diseased tree removal. The Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. By order of the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk Martin J. Kirsch Mayor CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration of 1994 maintenance assessments for the ILN (Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment) Project Area, proposed to be City Project No. 895. Background: On March 14, 1988, the Council adopted Resolution No. 7405, establishing a policy that the actual cost of performing current maintenance services in the ILN Project Area (area approximately bounded by Lyndale on the east and 77th Street on the south) would be assessed. The special assessment to multi- residential and commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable property within the district being assessed an equal amount. Current maintenance services for the district would include, but not necessarily be limited to: 1. Landscape maintenance of common properties including, among other things, tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing and edging. • 2. Irrigation maintenance. 3. Painting and repair of wood furniture. 4. Trash removal and general maintenance including repair and replacement of lights, sidewalks, curbs, furniture and plantings. These items are extra services provided directly to the ILN Project Area and do not include services provided to the entire City. Estimated and actual costs for the ILN maintenance services 1988-1993 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $7,001.47 1989 $7,254 $6,135.54 1990 $7,514 $7,762.52 1991 $7,780 $8,555.46 1992 $8,894 $7,031.70 1993 $9,200 The construction of 77th Street in 1993 and 1994 will necessitate expanding the borders of the d LN assessment district. Staff anticipates expanding the district in increments as the construction progresses. At this time, it is not possible to determine what the final borders of the district will be, and what the resulting maintenance costs will total. The estimate for 1993 was based on previous years' • costs plus some boundary expansion. Staff will have further information to present to the Council regarding the 1993 and 1994 maintenance assessment district at the end of this year's construction season, in late October or early November. a Recommended Motion: Support the continuance of specially assessing an ILN Project Area for the period of January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994, and direct staff to provide information on or before December 31, 1993 to redefine the project area and to establish an estimated cost of current maintenance services to be provided to the redefined project area in 1994. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a policy for assessing the costs. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Continued maintenance service for this area is recommended by staff in order to sustain current standards for landscaping and maintenance. Action on this item should be taken at this time to continue the special assessment process toward a 1994 project, proposed to be City Project No. 895, which would specially assess costs of current services provided within the ILN (Interstate/ Lyndale/Nicollet) project area for the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994. E Respectfully submitted, James D. Prosser City Manager JDP:ds 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 167 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Consideration of 1994 maintenance assessments for the ILN (Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment) Project Area, proposed to be City Project No. 892. Background: On March 14, 1988, the Council adopted Resolution No. 7405 establishing a policy that the actual cost of performing current maintenance services in the ILN Project Area (area approximately bounded by Lyndale on the east and 77th Street on the south) would be assessed. The special assessment to multi- residential and commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable property within the district being assessed an equal amount. Current maintenance services for the district would include, but not necessarily be limited to: 1. Landscape maintenance of common properties including, among other things, tree trimming, mowing, fertilizing and edging. 2. Irrigation maintenance. 3. Painting and repair of wood furniture. 4. Trash removal and general maintenance including repair and replacement of lights, sidewalks, curbs, furniture and plantings. These items are extra services provided directly to the ILN Project Area and do not include services provided to the entire City. Estimated and actual costs for the ILN maintenance services 1988-1993 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $7,001.47 1989 $7,254 $6,135.54 1990 $7,514 $7,762.52 1991 $7,780 $8,555.46 1992 $8,894 $7,031.70 1993 $9,200 The construction of 77th Street in 1993 and 1994 will necessitate expanding the borders of the ILN assessment district. Staff anticipates expanding the district in increments as the construction progresses. At this time, it is not possible to determine what the final borders of the district will be, and what the resulting maintenance costs will total. The estimate for 1993 was based on previous years' 10 costs plus some boundary expansion. Staff will have further information to present to the Council regarding the 1993 and 1994 maintenance assessment district at the end of this year's construction season, in late October or early November. 561 • Recommended Motion: Support the continuance of specially assessing an ILN Project Area for the period of January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994, and direct staff to provide information on or before December 31, 1993 to redefine the project area and to establish an estimated cost of current maintenance services to be provided to the redefined project area in 1994. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Resolution No. 7405, adopted in 1988, established a policy for assessing the costs. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Continued maintenance service for this area is recommended by staff in order to sustain current standards for landscaping and maintenance. Action on this item should be taken at this time to continue the special assessment process toward a 1994 project, proposed to be City Project No. 892, which would specially assess costs of current services provided within the ILN (Interstate/ Lyndale/Nicollet) project area for the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994. Respect lly submitted, Jame . Prosser City anager JDP:ds 0 . CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 166 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Preparation of assessment rolls and setting hearing date for City Project No. 874, 1992 ILN (Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment Area) Maintenance. Background: City staff has determined costs to be assessed for the maintenance of the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet Redevelopment Area, City Project No. 874, the 1992 ILN Maintenance Project. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Estimated and actual costs for the ILN maintenance services 1988-1993 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $7,001.47 1989 $7,254 $6,135.54 1990 $7,514 $7,762.52 1991 $7,780 $8,555.46 • 1992 $8,894 $7,031.70 1993 $9,200 The construction of 77th Street in 1993 and 1994 will necessitate expanding the borders of the ILN assessment district. Staff anticipates expanding the district in increments as the construction progresses. At this time, it is not possible to determine what the final borders of the district will be, and what the resulting maintenance costs will total. The estimate for 1993 was based on previous years' costs and the area remaining the same. Staff will have further information to present to the Council regarding the 1993 and 1994 maintenance assessment district at the end of this year's construction season, in late October or early November. Recommended Motion: Adopt the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of the proposed assessment roll for ILN maintenance, and the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: Council ordered the work, and the work is completed. Alternative Recommendation: Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing. 5F1 Discussion/Decision Mode: In order to meet certain legal requirements for publishing legal notices and notifying affected property owners, staff is requesting approval at this time. submitted, James D Prosser City O§ihager JDP:ds Attachments • 5Fa-. RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR ILN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 874 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance of the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet (ILN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance amount to $7,031.70 for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost.to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $7,031.70. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer and the Operations Coordinator, shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to-be specially assessed for such maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the Clerk's office for public inspection. 3. The City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 5F3 • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR ILN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 874 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 14, 1993, the city clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of maintaining the Interstate/Lyndale/Nicollet (ILN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by Lyndale Avenue, 78th Street, the railroad tracks and 77th Street including that property known as Hennepin County Property Identification Number 34-028-24-33-0073, in the City of Richfield, Minnesota for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 26th day of July, 1993, . in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the Clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 165 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Resolution relating to 1994 maintenance assessments, LHN (Lyndale/HUB/Nicollet) Redevelopment Area, City Project No. 891. Background: On January •26, 1981, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6372, which established a service in the LHN area (approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue) which would be specially assessed. The special assessment to commercial property would be made on the basis of area, with each square foot of assessable commercial property within the district being assessed an equal amount. All single family, two family and multiple family residential property within this area were eliminated from the special assessment levy. In 1982, agreements were reached with owners in the LHN area related to maintenance of property. For the most part, each owner was to be responsible for property to the curb while the City is responsible for common areas such as street islands. Although the City does perform some maintenance work for individual property owners, these costs are directly assessed to the appropriate owner and maintenance of common areas continues to be assessed to the entire district. Current maintenance services for the district • would include, but not necessarily be limited to, one or more of the following: 1. Landscaping, including tree trimming; 2. Sidewalk sweeping in the summer; 3. Snow removal in the winter; 4. Sidewalk deicing; 5. Painting and repair of wood furniture; 6. Trash removal; 7. General maintenance, including repairs and replacement; and 8. Irrigation maintenance. These items are extra services provided directly to the LHN Redevelopment Area and do not include services provided to the entire City. For example, all City streets are swept twice a year, and for this service there would be no charge to the LHN maintenance assessment. However, any additional street sweeping in the LHN area would be an assessable item. Estimated and actual costs for LHN maintenance services 1989-1994 were/are: Year Estimated Actual 1989 $43,151.19 1990 $44,560 $43,539.10 1991 $44,153 $43,825.22 . 1992 $46,484 $47,005.26 1993 $45,050 1994 $45,115 5E1 Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution proposing to specially assess for the costs of current services provided within the LHN project area for the period of January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994, and to set the public hearing date for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Resolution No. 6372, adopted in 1981, established a policy for assessing the costs. 2. This policy allows staff to continue to provide excellent service to the LHN Redevelopment Area. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose to establish a set rate and limit the, maintenance performed to that dollar amount; however, staff believes the redevelopment area would suffer if limited maintenance was performed. Discussion/Decision Mode : Continued maintenance service for this commercial area is recommended by staff in order to sustain the current standards for landscaping and maintenance which have been successful over the past years. ?.I JDP:ds Attachment Respe 1 y submitted, James Prosser City M ager 0 5GCL • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED WITHIN THE LYNDALE/HUB/NICOLLET PROJECT AREA FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1994 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1994 CITY PROJECT NO. 891 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. There is hereby established a special assessment district, the boundaries of which are conterminous with the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Project Area, for the purposes of assessing for current services provided by the City. 2. The following current services of the City are hereby proposed to be undertaken by the City in the district, with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against benefited property within the district: ? Snow, ice or rubbish removal; ? Weed elimination; ? Elimination or removal of public health or safety hazards from private property, excluding and structure included under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 463.15 to 463.26; ? Installation or repair of water service lines; ? Street sprinkling or other dust treatment of streets; ? Trimming and care of trees and the removal of unsound trees; ? Repair of sidewalks, crosswalks, and other pedestrian walkways; ? Operation of the street lighting system; ? Maintenance of landscaped areas and other public amenities on or adjacent to street right-of-way; ? Maintenance of Civic Plaza; ? Snow removal and other maintenance of streets; ? Painting and repair of wood furniture; and ? General maintenance, including repairs and replacement. 3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the district. It is proposed that special assessments on commercial property be made on the basis of the area with each square foot of assessable commercial property within the district being assessed an equal amount for maintenance of common area. Exempt from the special assessment levy shall be all single family, two-family, multiple family residential property within the LHN redevelopment district. Special maintenance of individual commercial properties shall be assessed directly for costs incurred in performing said maintenance to said property. 5C3 4. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give public notice of a hearing by this Council at which the Council will consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. The City Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing as required by law. Such hearing shall be held on Monday, July 26, 1993, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda. 5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the aforementioned services for the period of January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned current services during that period is $45,115. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: 10 Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 10 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 164 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Preparation of assessment rolls and setting hearing date for City Project 873, 1992 LHN (Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Area) Maintenance. Background: City staff has determined costs to be assessed for the maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area, City Project 873, the 1992 LHN Maintenance Project. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Estimated and actual costs for the LHN maintenance services 1988-1994 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $44,159.33 1989 $40,614 $43,151.19 1990 $44,560 $43,539.10 1991 $44,153 $43,825.22 1992 $46,484 $47,005.26 1993 $45,322 1994 $45,277 The increased costs in 1992 were due to streetlight repairs. Two streetlights were knocked down and several light heads cannot be repaired. Recommended Motion: Adopt the resolution declaring costs to be assessed and ordering preparation of the proposed assessment roll for LHN maintenance, and adopt the resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: Council ordered the work, and the work is completed. Alternative Recommendation: Council may make any changes to the assessment roll as deemed necessary after the public hearing. Discussion/Decision Mode: In order to meet certification approval at this time. deadlines, staff is requesting Respect lly submitted, Jame . Prosser City anager JDP:ds Attachments ?- 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LHN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 873 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance of the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield and the expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance amount to $47,005.26 for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $47,005.26. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer and the Operations Coordinator, shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance • against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the Clerk's office for public inspection. 3. The City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR LHN MAINTENANCE JANUARY 1, 1992 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1992 CITY PROJECT NO. 873 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 14, 1993, the City Clerk was directed to prepare a proposed assessment of the cost of maintaining the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet (LHN) Redevelopment Area which is approximately bounded by 64th Street, First Avenue, 67th Street and Emerson Avenue in the City of Richfield, Minnesota for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 26th day of July, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. to pass • upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and the Clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance. The City Clerk shall also cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor ATTEST: 0 Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk sr- • • • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 163 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Proposed 1994 alley maintenance special assessment project, City Project No. 893. Background: The alley policy adopted by the City Council in 1980 provides that "all costs involved in maintaining an alley will be assessed against the property abutting the alley." In 1981, the maintenance functions to unpaved alleys covered sweeping, cleaning of potholes and cold patching. In 1982 and years since, the maintenance functions covered by this assessment included not only repair work to unpaved alleys, but also an assessment to all alleys, paved or unpaved, for snowplowing services. A concrete joint sealing maintenance program for paved alleys was initiated in the 1989 alley maintenance program. Estimated and actual costs for the alley maintenance services 1989-1994 are: Year Estimated Actual 1989 $20,000 $17,725.98 1990 $20,000 $17,213.95 1991 $20,000 $21,426.94 1992 $20,000 $19,752.06 1993 $20,000 1994 $20,000 Increased costs in 1991 were due to the record-breaking snowfalls in October and November of that year. For 1994, the estimate is $20,000 for alley maintenance or approximately $10.75 for a 50-foot lot. $7.75/per lot is the estimate for sweeping and a normal winter of snowplowing. The additional $3.00 per lot is an estimate of costs to continue a concrete joint sealing maintenance program on paved alleys as a part of routine maintenance. Estimates of additional costs on unpaved alleys each year have been about $23.00/per lot. Costs have varied depending on the amount of patching required. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution which proposes to specially assess the costs of 1994 services for alley maintenance and sets the public hearing on this special assessment project for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Previously adopted policy mandates the assessments. 2. The project is feasible. 5C-1 Alternative Recommendation- Council may choose to establish a set rate for snowplowing. However, the remaining unpaved alleys in the City will still require yearly maintenance. It should also be noted that the older concrete alleys now require cracksealing. Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may choose to delay adoption of this resolution until the next meeting; however, any further delay would cause scheduling problems with legal notices required by Minnesota State Statute. submitted, Prosser JDP:cak Attachment 0 CZ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PROPOSING TO SPECIALLY ASSESS FOR THE COSTS OF CURRENT SERVICES PROVIDED FOR ALLEY MAINTENANCE IN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD JANUARY 1, 1994 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1994 CITY PROJECT NO. 893 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That area which includes the property which abuts improved alleys in Richfield (the "District") is hereby established as a special assessment district for the purpose of assessing for current services provided by the City; 2. That the following current services of the City are hereby proposed to be undertaken by the City in the District with the cost of such services to be specially assessed against the benefited property within the District: the maintenance and snowplowing of alleys; 3. The area proposed to be specially assessed for such current services consists of every assessable lot and parcel of land within the District. It is proposed that special assessments on property be made on the basis of prorated share of assessable abutting footage as defined in the alley improvement policy, IS Resolution No. 6345; 4. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish notice of a public hearing by this Council at which time the Council will consider the undertaking of such current services and the levying of special assessments to bear the costs thereof. Such notice shall be published in the official newspaper at least once and at least two weeks prior to the date of hearing. Such hearing shall be held on Monday, July 26, 1993, commencing at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached on the agenda. 5. It is hereby proposed that the project consist of the costs of the aforementioned services for the period from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994. The estimated cost of providing all of the aforementioned current services during that period, using day labor, is $20,000. 6. That the project is feasible. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 14th day of June, 1993. ATTEST: Martin J. Kirsch Mayor Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 162 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Resolution declaring costs to be assessed for alley maintenance and snowplowing for the period January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992, and setting a public hearing date for City Project No. 872, 1992 Alley Maintenance. Background: City staff •has determined costs to be assessed for alley maintenance, City Project No. 872. Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls, and setting the hearing date for the proposed assessment. Property owners on permanently paved concrete alleys are assessed for snowplowing, joint repair, and patching work done on the alley right of way. Estimated and actual costs for the alley maintenance services 1988-1994 were: Year Estimated Actual 1988 $ 8,453.93 1989 1990 $20,000 $20,000 $17,725.98 $17,213.95 1991 $20,000 $21,426.94 1992 $20,000 $19,752.06 1993 $20,000 1994 $20,000 Increased costs in 1991 were due to snow removal. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment roll; and adopt the attached resolution setting the date of hearing on the proposed assessment for July 26, 1993. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Council ordered this work completed. 2. Adoption of the resolutions at this time will allow adequate time for staff to complete necessary legal requirements in order to meet certification deadlines. Alternative Recommendation: Council may revise the special assessment roll after the public hearing as deemed necessary. 9 0 Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may choose to delay action on the attached resolutions; however, Minnesota State law requires specific notices and public meetings, and scheduling problems may occur beyond a two week delay. submitted, James (D I Prosser City Mofiager JDP:ds Attachments I* 11 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1992 ALLEY MAINTENANCE AND SNOWPLOWING - CITY PROJECT NO. 872 WHEREAS, costs have been determined for the maintenance and snowplowing of the following alleys in the City of Richfield. The expenses incurred or to be incurred for such maintenance and snowplowing for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992 amount to $19,752.06. Number Surrounding Avenues Surrounding Streets 1001 Xerxes - Washburn 66th - 67th 1002 Xerxes - Washburn 67th - 68th 1003 Xerxes - Washburn 68th - 69th 1004 Xerxes - Washburn 69th - 70th 1005 Washburn - Vincent 66th - 67th 1006 Washburn - Vincent 67th - 68th 1007 Washburn - Vincent 68th - 69th 1008 Washburn - Vincent 69th - 70th 1009 Vincent - Upton 66th - 67th 1010 Vincent - Upton 67th - 68th 1011 Vincent - Upton 68th - 69th 1012 Vincent - Upton 69th - 70th 1013 Upton - Thomas 66th - 67th . 1014 Upton - Thomas 68th - 69th 1015 Upton - Thomas 69th - 70th 1016 Thomas - Sheridan 66th - 67th 1017 Thomas - Sheridan 67th - 68th 1018 Thomas - Sheridan 68th - 69th 1019 Thomas - Sheridan 69th - 70th 1020 Sheridan - Russell 66th - 67th 1021 Sheridan - Russell 67th - 68th 1022 Sheridan - Russell 68th - 69th 1023 Sheridan - Russell 69th - 70th 1024 Russell - Queen 66th - 67th 1025 Russell - Queen 67th - 68th 1026 Russell - Queen 68th - 69th 1027 Russell - Queen 69th - 70th 1028 Queen - Penn 66th - 67th 1029 Queen - Penn 67th - 68th 1030 Queen - Penn 68th - 69th 1031 Queen - Penn, 69th - 70th 2001 Penn - Oliver 63rd - 64th 2002 Oliver- Newton 63rd - 64th 2004 Morgan - Logan 63rd - 64th 2005 Logan - Knox 63rd - 64th 2007 James - Irving 63rd - 64th 2008 Irving - Humboldt 63rd - 64th 2009 Humboldt - Girard 63rd - 64th 2010 Girard - Fremont (35W) 63rd - 64th 2011 Girard - Fremont (35W) 64th - 65th 2012 Girard - Fremont (35W) 65th - 66th 58-3 • 2013 2014 Fremont (35W) - Emerson Fremont (35W) -Emerson 64th 65th - 65th - 66th 2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred 2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred 2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr 2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th 2021 Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th 3002 Lyndale - Garfield 68th - 69th 3003 Augsburg - Garfield 70th - 71st 3004 Augsburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd 3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72nd - 73rd 3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th 3007 Garfield - Harriet 71st - 72nd 3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd 3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th 3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th 3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th 3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd 3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th 3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th -69th 3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd 3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th 3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th 3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th • 3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th 3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th 3025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st 3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd 3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd 3029 lst - Stevens 72nd - 73rd 3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3032 2nd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th 3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th 3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th 3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th 3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th 3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th 3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th 4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th 4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd 4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd 4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th 4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th 4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th 4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th 4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th 4012 22nd - Standish 65th - 66th 4013 13th - 14th Avenue 66th - 67th 6-6-q NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. The portion of the cost to be assessed against benefited property owners is declared to be $19,752.06. 2. The City Clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such maintenance against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected, without regard to cash valuation as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the Clerk's office for public inspection. 3. The Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch Mayor CJ ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 9 5-65" • • 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR 1992 ALLEY MAINTENANCE- CITY PROJECT NO. 872 WHEREAS, by a resolution passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on June 14, 1993, the City Clerk was directed to prepare assessment of the cost of maintaining the following alleys in the City of Richfield for the period of January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992. Number 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 2001 2002 2004 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Surrounding Avenues Xerxes - Washburn Xerxes - Washburn Xerxes - Washburn Xerxes - Washburn Washburn - Vincent Washburn - Vincent Washburn - Vincent Washburn - Vincent Vincent - Upton Vincent - Upton Vincent - Upton Vincent - Upton Upton - Thomas Upton - Thomas Upton - Thomas Thomas - Sheridan Thomas - Sheridan Thomas - Sheridan Thomas - Sheridan Sheridan - Russell Sheridan - Russell Sheridan - Russell Sheridan - Russell Russell - Queen Russell - Queen Russell - Queen Russell - Queen Queen - Penn Queen - Penn Queen - Penn Queen - Penn Penn - Oliver Oliver - Newton Morgan - Logan Logan - Knox James - Irving Irving - Humboldt Humboldt - Girard Girard - Fremont (35W) Girard - Fremont (35W) Girard - Fremont (35W) Fremont (35W) - Emerson Surrounding Streets 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 66th - 67th 67th - 68th 68th - 69th 69th - 70th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 63rd - 64th 64th - 65th 65th - 66th 64th - 65th 2014 Fremont (35W) - Emerson 65th - 66th • 2015 Dupont - Colfax 63rd - Mildred 2016 Colfax - Bryant 63rd - Mildred 2017 Bryant - Aldrich 63rd - Mildred 2019 Graham - Lyndale 66th - Lk Shr Dr 2020 Aldrich - Lyndale 75th - 76th 2021. Aldrich - Lyndale 76th - 77th 3002 Lyndale - Garfield 68th - 69th 3003 Augsburg - Garfield 70th - 71st 3004 Augsburg - Garfield 71st - 72nd 3005 Lyndale - Garfield 72nd - 73rd 3006 Lyndale - Garfield 73rd - 74th 3007 Garfield - Harriet 71st -,72nd 3008 Garfield - Harriet 72nd - 73rd 3009 Garfield - Harriet 73rd - 74th 3011 Harriet - Grand 67th - 68th 3012 Harriet - Grand 68th - 69th 3013 Harriet - Grand 72nd - 73rd 3014 Harriet - Grand 73rd - 74th 3015 Grand - Pleasant 68th - 69th 3016 Grand - Pleasant 72nd - 73rd 3018 Wentworth - Blaisdell 67th - 68th 3020 Blaisdell - Nicollet 72nd - 73rd 3021 Blaisdell - Nicollet 73rd - 74th 3022 Blaisdell - Nicollet 74th - 75th 3023 Blaisdell - Nicollet 75th - 76th 3024 Nicollet - 2nd Avenue 68th - 69th 3025 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 70th - 71st 3026 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 71st - 72nd 3027 Nicollet - 1st Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3028 1st - Stevens 71st - 72nd 3029 1st - Stevens 72nd - 73rd 3030 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3031 Stevens - 2nd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3032 2nd - 3rd Avenue 66th - 67th 3033 2nd - 3rd Avenue 71st - 72nd 3034 2nd - 3rd Avenue 72nd - 73rd 3035 3rd - Clinton 66th - 67th 3036 3rd - Clinton 73rd - 74th 3037 Clinton - 4th Avenue 66th - 67th 3038 Clinton - 4th Avenue 73rd - 74th 3039 4th - 5th Avenue 66th - 67th 3040 4th - 5th Avenue 73rd - 74th 4001 13th - 14th Avenue 65th - 66th 4002 14th - 15th Avenue 62nd - 63rd 4004 15th - Bloomington 62nd - 63rd 4005 15th - Bloomington 65th - 66th 4006 Bloomington - 16th Avenue 65th - 66th 4007 Cedar - Longfellow 63rd - 64th 4008 Cedar - Longfellow 64th - 65th 4009 Cedar - Longfellow 65th - 66th 4012 22nd - Standish 65th - 66th 4013 13th - 14th Avenue 66th - 67th 569 • 0 WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that such proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 26th day of July, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached on the agenda, to pass upon such proposed assessment. At such time and place all persons owning property affected by said maintenance assessment will be given an opportunity to be heard in reference to such assessment. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing. The Clerk shall state in the notice the total cost of the maintenance; and also caused mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll, not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 14th day of June, 1993. Martin J. Kirsch ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk Mayor 9 5/q CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 161 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Approval of the•1993 to 1994 agreement with the City of Minneapolis for participation in the Urban Corps Intern Program. Background: The Urban Corps provides college students with an innovative service learning environment. Through a well-planned internship, students get an in-depth exposure in a specific field and gain valuable practical experience. At the same time, the City receives the benefit of the students' enthusiasm and academic skills at a nominal cost. For a number of years, the City of Richfield has cooperated with the Urban Corps to place area college students in internship positions with the City. This arrangement has been quite beneficial because it has enabled the City to hire additional part-time employees, at very little cost, to either undertake short-term studies or projects, or to supplement our full-time work force in performing some of the City's ongoing services. Under the program, undergraduates are paid $5.75 per hour and 41 graduate students are paid $6.75 per hour. The cost to Richfield is $2.97 per hour and $3.48 per hour. These are the same rates which applied for 1991-92. In some cases, new Federal regulations may lower the City's share of a work-study student's salary. The Urban Corps Program is administered by the City of Minneapolis. In order for Richfield to continue participating in this program, it is necessary to execute an agreement with the City of Minneapolis, a copy of which is attached. This agreement does not commit the City of Richfield to hire Urban Corps Interns, but it does provide the City with the option to hire interns through the Urban Corps Program as we choose. Recommended Motion: Authorize the execution of the attached agreement with the City of Minneapolis for participation in the 1993/1994 Urban Corps Intern Program. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Urban Corps Program provides a supplement to our full- time work force. 2. The Program also provides a resource for short-term studies or projects. 0 3. The cost of Urban Corps participants is relatively low. 5R-I • Alternative Recommendation: Do not approve the execution of the agreement, thus terminating the program. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is placed on the June 14, 1993 agenda for consideration in order for Departments to consider the internship program for the coming year. Respectf)^l.y submitted, James Prosser City MAhager JDP:ff n U RECEIVED MAY 1993 f `? f TWIN CITY AREA )Lr,t:C ?{ URBAN CORPS 111 City Hall, 350 South 5th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55415-1314 (612) 673-3027 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May, 1993 TO: Program Directors FROM: Fran Hormel, Coordinator RE: 1993 - 94 Contracts for Participation in the Urban Corps Program Enclosed are two copies of the Agreement regarding joint participation of your agency and the Urban Corps in the internship program. Note the additional • page on the back of one contract that must be completed and notarized. Please obtain authorized signatures on both copies of the Agreement and return both to the above address. After processing, one original copy will be returned to you for your files. No payment schedule of your costs has been included, because new Federal regulations may, in some cases, lower your share of a work-study student's salary. A new schedule will be sent to you if there is a change; otherwise, the schedule dated 7/1/91 will remain valid. If you have any questions, please call me at (612) 673-3027. Thank you for your participation in the Urban Corps program. FH/ns Twin City Area Urban Corps - a creative experience in service learning An equal opportunity, affirmative action employer ,5A-,3 1993 - 1994 AGREEMENT FOR PARTICIPATION IN URBAN CORPS PROGRAM BETWEEN CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS ANb THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 19 by and between the City of Minneapolis (herein called "Urban Corps") and (herein called "Agency"). WHEREAS, the above named Agency, a public organization or private non-profit tax-exempt organization, desires to participate in the Twin City Area Urban Corps and in consideration for the assignment of Urban Corps student interns to the Agency, we do hereby agree to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Urban Corps shall have the right to approve or reject requests for interns submitted by this Agency upon forms provided for that purpose by the Urban Corps. 2. The Agency will accept a student as an intern by completing and signing the Assignment section of the student's Urban Corps application form. 3. The Agency shall utilize such students as may be assigned to it in ac- cordance with the specifications set forth in its written request to the Urban Corps, and shall immediately notify the Urban Corps of any change in nature of assignment, duties, supervisor or work location. 4. The Agency shall provide such students as may be assigned to it with a safe • place to work and with responsible supervision. 5. The Urban Corps shall have the right to inspect the work being performed by such students as may be assigned to the Agency, and shall have the right to interview such students and their supervisors. 6. The Urban Corps shall have the right to require such students as may be assigned to the Agency to attend such general or special meetings, or to appear at the Urban Corps office, individually or as a group, as shall be necessary for the proper functions of the program. 7. In accordance with the requirements of Federal and State law, work performed by such students as may be assigned to the Agency shall: a. Be in the public interest; b. Not result in the displacement of employed workers or impair existing contracts for services, or fill positions that are vacant because of a labor dispute: C. Not involve the construction, operation or maintenance of so much of any facility as is used, or is to be used, for sectarian instruction or as a place of religious worship; d. Not involve any partisan or nonpartisan political activity or be for the Office of Education. 5P-4 8. The Agency shall require such students as may be assigned to it to submit time reports and follow such other procedures as may be established by the Urban Corps. 09. The Urban Corps shall have the right to remove any student assigned to the Agency from said assignment and from the Agency at any time for any reason without prior notice, and the Urban Corps shall not be obligated to replace said student. 10. The Agency shall have the right to remove any student assigned to said Agency at any time with prior notice given to the student and the Urban Corps. 11. The Agency warrants that it is in compliance with the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 252), and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363 and Section 181.59 and Minneapolis Code of Ordinance, Chapter 139 and 141, where applicable. 12. The Agency shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless the Urban Corps from all claims, causes or actions which may result from the assignments of students to the Agency or because of the acts or omissions of the students. 13. The Agency will be responsible for compensating to a work-study student any monies earned before or after the student's specified work-study award dates and/or monies earned over and above the dollar amount specified in the student's work-study award. 14. The Agency shall obtain at its own expense Worker's Compensation insurance . (or shall be self-insured under State Law) for such students as may be assigned to it under this Agreement. For the purposes of the Agreement the Agency shall be deemed the student's employer and that no employment relationship exists between the student and Urban Corps, and, further, that no employment relationship exists between the Agency and Urban Corps. 15. The Agency shall pay to the Urban Corps 51.5% or other percentage figure, as agreed upon by identifying the percentage figure on the student's Urban Corps application form, of the gross compensation earned by such students assigned and accepted by the Agency under a Federal or State program. The Urban Corps will bill the Agency, in accordance with bi-weekly payroll periods, for its proper share of the compensation of such students as may have been assigned to the Agency and performed work during said period. Student hourly rates are set forth in Section 15(a) and 15(b) of this Agreement. a. Hourly compensation for students will be set at $5.75 per hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelor's Degree, and $6.75 per hour for graduate students or other agreed upon hourly compensa- tion rates, or other rates for Urban Corps student interns as established by the City of Minneapolis, through a salary ordinance replacing current minimum rates. b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one who has received a B.A., B.S., or equivalent degree or is enrolled in the fifth year of a five year program. 5-4-5- 16. At the election of the Agency, the Urban Corps shall place students to intern under a Stipend program. This option will be specified in the Assignment Form which the intern's Agency supervisor must sign before commencement of the internship. The Stipend rate which the Agency shall pay the Urban Corps is $30.00 per week for each week the student works. 17. At the election of the Agency, the Urban Corps shall place interns for whom the Agency will pay the intern's total compensation plus an additional twenty-one and one half percent (21.5%) for administrative costs. This option will be specified in the Assignment Form which the intern's Agency supervisor must sign before commencement of the internship. Agency rates for said option are set forth in Section 17(a) and 17(b) of this Agreement. a. Agency rates for students will be set at minimum rates of $6.99 per hour for entering freshmen through receipt of a Bachelor's Degree, and $8.21 per hour for graduate students; other agreed upon hourly compensation rates not to be below specified rates in 17(a); or other rates for Urban Corps student interns as established by the City of Minneapolis through a salary ordinance replacing current minimum rates. b. A graduate student is defined for purposes of this Agreement as one who has received a B.A., B.S., or equivalent degree or is enrolled in the fifth year of a five year program. 18. Performance under this contract shall commence on July 1, 1993 and terminate on June 30, 1994 unless amended in writing as mutually agreed upon by both the Agency and the Urban Corps; however, either party may terminate upon . sixty (60) days written notice. Based upon the statements and affirmations made by the Agency through the above document, the Urban Corps hereby agrees to the assignment of students to said Agency, in accordance with said document and the applicable laws and regulations. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS AGENCY By City of Richfield Mayor Agency Name ATTEST: 6700 Portland Avenue South Address City Clerk COUNTERSIGNED: Richfield MN 55423 City State Zip Code City Finance Officer By Title Mayor Approved as to Legality: By Title City Manager • Minneapolis Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: City Clerk ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF COIR3MTION STATE OF ) )SS COUNTY OF ) On this day of 19before me appeared and to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn did say that they are respectively the and of the corporation described in and who executed the foregoing instrument; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation; that said instrument was • executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors; and said and acknowledge said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public 3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 160 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Presentation of?Certificates of Appreciation to the 1993 Miss Richfield candidates. Background: Each year a young lady is selected as Miss Richfield during.the Fourth of July activities. This year there are 10 candidates. The City Council would like to thank the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board for their donation again this year to reimburse the City for costs related to Miss Richfield activities. Their participation in this community event is greatly appreciated. Recommended Motion: Present each candidate with a Certificate of Appreciation. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This has been a long-standing tradition. 2. The candidates will be present to receive these certificates. Alternative Recommendation: is 1. None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the June 14 agenda and certificates have been prepared. Respectfully submitted, City JDP:cak Prosser aer 0 3-/ • MISS RICHFIELD CANDIDATES 1993-1994 HEATHER BORCHARDT Heather is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend the Minnesota School of Business to pursue a career in office administration. Her parents are Susan and George Borchardt. Heather is sponsored by Bloomington Chrysler Plymouth. KARIN MARKES Karin is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend the University of Minnesota Duluth to pursue a career in business. Her parents are Mary and Larry Markes. Karin is sponsored by Fred Babcock VFW. KARA MURPHY Kara is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend St. Thomas University to pursue a career in Journalism/Public Relations. Her parents are Margie and Thomas Murphy. Kara is sponsored by the Richfield Chamber of Commerce. BRIGETTE MYRE Brigette is a 1992 graduate of Edina High School. She is currently attending Normandale Community College pursuing a career in professional makeup artistry for television and film. Her parents are Charles Myre Jr. and Darcy Knight. Brigette is sponsored by the Hampton Inn. AMBER PICCIANDRA • Amber is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend Normandale Community College to pursue a career in business. Her parents are Jody and Paul Picciandra. Amber is sponsored by the Hub Dairy Queen. RACHEL RAYGOR Rachel is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend St. Thomas University. Her parents are Deborah and Richard Raygor. Rachel is sponsored by the Hub Merchants. ANDREA SCHULTE Andrea is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend Northwestern College to pursue a career in Music Education. Her parents are Judith and Paul Schulte. Andrea is sponsored by Richfield Bank and Trust. LISA SCHWENKE Lisa is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend Winona State University to pursue a career in art or teaching. Her parents are Mary and Kim Schwenke. Lisa is sponsored by Richfield McDonald's. TERESA VERNON Teresa is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend the University of Minnesota to pursue a career in biochemistry. Her parents are Audrey and Richard Vernon. Teresa is sponsored by the Richfield Optimist Club. ALISON WITTHANS Alison is a 1993 graduate of Richfield High School. She plans to attend Normandale Community College to pursue a career in the health field. Her parents are Manna and Lawrence Witthans. Alison is sponsored by the Richfield Rotary Club. RICHFIELD 1992-1993 ROYALTY 0 MISS RICHFIELD JENNIFER EIDSMO Jennifer graduated from Richfield High School and is currently working as a major account facsimile representative for Copy Duplicating Products in Richfield. Jennifer is also a student at Normandale Community College. She is looking forward to competing for the Minneapolis Aquatennial Queen of the Lakes title in July. Janice and David Eidsmo are Jennifer's parents. PRINCESS AMY CLENDENING Amy is a 1992 graduate of Richfield High School and is currently working toward an undergraduate degree at the University of Minnesota. Amy, who is a sophomore, would like to major in broadcast journalism or speech communications. In her spare time, Amy continues to play the piano, golf and bicycle. Penny and Paul Clendening are Amy's parents. PRINCESS KAREN LINDSTROM The University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire is Karen's home during the school year. Karen is a junior and is studying secondary education. A 1991 graduate of Richfield High, Karen plans to specialize in French and English as a second language. She is looking forward to spending a semester next year in Toulon, France with a foreign study program. Marcy and Jerry Lindstrom are Karen's parents. n a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 159 Agenda June 14, 1993 Issue Statement: Presentation of•the "Gene Jacobsen Citizen of the Year" award to Garnett Kirchner. Background: The Richfield Human Rights Commission has selected a Citizen of the Year for the past 20 years. The award is presented to a person whose actions demonstrate an awareness and commitment to the attitudes and practices that foster human understanding, tolerance and the spirit of human relations. Recommended Motion: The City Council, in cooperation with the Human Rights Commission, should present the award to Garnett Kirchner. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Human Rights Commission has met to review nominations and discuss the presentation of this award for 1992. 2. Based upon that meeting, Garnett Kirchner was selected as the 1992 award recipient. • 3. Mrs. Kirchner has a long history of commitment to the community and serves in the area of human understanding and relations through active membership in numerous civic organizations including the American Field Service (AFS) and the Sister City Commission. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This presentation has been placed on the Presentation Section of the June 14, 1993 City Council agenda. A reception for Garnett and her family and friends will be held in the Council Chambers prior to the 7:00 p.m. Council meeting. Respectfuj,ly submitted, City. JDP:cak Prosser 0