The URL can be used to link to this page

5-14-90 agenda:sr- I CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 120 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Presentation of.the "Gene Jacobsen Citizen of the Year" award to John Hamilton. Background: The Richfield Human Rights Commission has selected a Citizen of the Year for the past 17 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 Mr. Hamilton. Basis for Recommendation: - 1. John Hamilton is an enthusiastic, hardworking volunteer. His many activities include working with the handicapped and - service clubs. He has been a member of the school board and has served as Mayor of the City. He has advocated for senior housing, latch key and other social action issues. 2. He was nominated by several people. Alternative Recommendation: 1. None Discussion/Decision Mode: This presentation has been placed on the Presentation Section of the May 14, 1990 City Council agenda. Prior to the 7:00 p.m. Council meeting, a reception for John and his friends will be held beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the Public Safety lobby. Respectf lly submitted, Jam g. Cit ger JDP:eja 0 4?- a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 121 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Presentation of•Final Payment from Hennepin County for 1989 Recycling and Composting Expenses. Background: Hennepin County Commissioner Randy Johnson will appear at the Monday, May 14, 1990 City Council meeting to present a final payment of $161,290 to Mayor Quam from Hennepin County. The check is final payment of Hennepin County's share of the recycling and composting expenses for 1989. Recommended Motion: Accept the check. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Richfield has a contract with Hennepin County for reimbursement of 80% of expenses incurred in our recycling _ and composting program. 2. This check is the final payment on that contract. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: Commissioner Johnson will be at the May 14, 1990 regular Council meeting to present the check. Respectfully submitted, --(91 Jame . Prosser City anager JDP/reb ewe,,-?+ ? Ilk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter N0.122 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Award of Contract for Floating Boardwalk System at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield. Background: The Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield plan for improvements in 1990 includes installation of a floating boardwalk through the cattail marsh in the northwest quarter of the park. Special Revenues in 1990 are anticipated to provide $245,000 to fund the Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield project which includes a boardwalk, playfeature, and possibly bridges and path work. Six sets of specifications were requested from various contractors. One bid was received at a formal bid opening held Monday, April 30, 1990. A copy of the bid minutes/tabulation is attached. Staff reviewed the bid and decided to deduct vertical wood posts and brackets. The posts are not essential to the project and -Y could be added at a later date should they become desirable. This deduct is in the amount of $27,905.18, which brings the total bid to $80,487.43. Staff had estimated the total cost of the boardwalk at $80,000. Recommended Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for a floating boardwalk system at Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield to Earl F. Andersen & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $80,487.43. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Earl F. Andersen & Associates, Inc. submitted the only bid that met specifications. 2. There is sufficient funding available for this improvement. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could choose to reject the bid and direct staff to rebid the project. However, staff does not believe a better price can be obtained from a reputable contractor. 2. Council may choose not to install the boardwalk in Veterans Memorial Park of Richfield at this time. 0 '4 1 A-? Discussion/Decision Mode: This item appears on the May 14, 1990 Council agenda. In order to have the project completed in time for the Fourth of July Celebration, staff is requesting a contract be awarded at this time. Respect lly submitted, Jame D. Prosser Cit Manager JDP/reb Attachment 11 0 CIA -,? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening April 30, 1990 11:00 A.M. Floating Boardwalk System at Veterans Memorial Park Bid No. 90-7 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 floating boardwalk system at Veterans Memorial Park, bid no. 90-7, as advertised in the official newspaper on April 30, 1990. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steve Devich, Administrative Services Director Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative • The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR BID TOTAL SECURITY Earl F. Anderson & Assoc. 5% Bid Bond $108,392.61 Bloomington The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the May 14, 1990 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 '7a CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 123 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Adoption of a resolution to enter into contracts with residential waste haulers for collection of recyclables in 1990. Background: Hennepin County reimburses cities for up to 80% of recycling expenses. Richfield has chosen to participate in the recycling grants program as long as Hennepin County continues to subsidize municipal programs and as long as Richfield residents are paying into the County recycling fund. Given our current program and corresponding high participation rates, Richfield will qualify for 80% reimbursement. Contracts with service providers are necessary in order to receive Hennepin County funding. The City will renew contracts with the residential waste haulers to partially reimburse them for recycling expenses. The proposed contract will pay haulers $1.85 per household per month. The term of the proposed contract is from January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. The $1.85 amount falls mid-range among rates paid by other Hennepin County municipalities. Without reimbursement by the City, these costs would be passed directly to residents and Richfield would not be able to take full advantage of the County's recycling grant program. Haulers have agreed to and signed the proposed contract. Haulers are aware of contract provisions. Recommended Motion: Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to enter into contracts with residential waste haulers to collect recyclables in Richfield. Basis of Recommendation: 1. County recycling monies can only be distributed to haulers through the cities. 2. Hennepin County requires cities to have contracts with recyclables collectors in order to receive reimbursement for collection expenses. 3. Without a reimbursement to haulers, Richfield residents would pay more for trash collection service and the City would not be taking full advantage of the County's grant program. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Council could choose not to participate in the County's recycling grant program; however, residents would continue to pay into the County's recycling fund but receive no benefits in return. 4u-1 2. Council could direct staff to negotiate other terms or conditions for the contracts with residential waste haulers. However, the proposed contract is fair and reasonable for all concerned parties and waste haulers have already agreed to the provisions of the proposed contract. Discussion/Decision Mode: Adoption of the resolution is recommended for the May 14 City Council meeting so that tonnage documentation as well as invoices can be compiled and processed in a timely manner. Respectf lly submitted, James Prosser City inager JDP/reb Attachment • 0 i? 7 g-a RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING RECYCLING AGREEMENTS WITH RESIDENTIAL WASTE HAULERS WHEREAS, Richfield will participate in Hennepin County's recycling grants program as long as the County continues to subsidize these programs and as long as Richfield residents must pay into the recycling fund; and WHEREAS, the City relies on private residential waste haulers to collect recyclables; and WHEREAS, the City needs to renew its agreement to pay waste haulers $1.85 per month per residential dwelling unit provided with recyclables collection for calendar year 1990; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to sign the Agreement for Payment by City for Collection of Recyclables.- 2. That the Agreement will apply to services rendered from- January 1, 1990 to December 31, 1990. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 14th day of May, 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk C, ?tX6.3 0 AGREEMENT Payment by City for Collection of Recyclables The City of Richfield ("City") and the undersigned licensed residential hauler ("Hauler") licensed under City Code, Section 601.15 hereby agree as follows: 1. Hauler agrees to conduct its activities in full conformity to the terms and conditions of City Code, Section 601, including: providing weekly collection of recyclables.and yard waste, monthly reporting of tonnage or volumes of materials - collected, and monthly reporting of where recyclables were marketed. Hauler agrees to provide the City and Hennepin County 0 with access to business records to verify this information. 2. Hauler agrees that no later than the date on which it supplies the City with invoices as required by paragraph 3 below, it will also supply an update of addresses of residential customers to the City for the purposes of contract performance verification and payment for recyclables.collection. This information is necessary to promote recycling and to comply with Hennepin County reporting requirements. 3. City agrees to pay Hauler the sum of $1.85 per month per residential dwelling unit provided with recyclables collection. The reimbursement is to offset costs incurred by haulers for recyclables collection. To qualify for such payment, invoices shall be submitted to the City by April 20, 1990, for reimbursement of January, February, and March collections, by 0 ?6-. July 20 , 1990, for reimbursement of April, May, and June collections, by October 20, 1990 for reimbursement of July, August, and September collections, and by January 20, 1991 for October, November, and December collections. 4. This contract shall apply to services rendered by Hauler from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 1990. 5. Haulers shall collect plastic containers specified by • Hennepin County and its Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) operator, within 30 days after the opening of its MRF or another processing facility identified by the county. Reimbursement for plastics collection expenses will be addressed when it is certain plastics will be added as a collection item. This Contract in no way prohibits Haulers from collecting plastics or other recyclable materials prior to their inclusion as "designated recyclables". 6. The City shall have the right to cancel the contract at its discretion. If the cancellation is the result of the revocation, suspension, or other termination of the Hauler's license, such cancellation shall be effective immediately. If the cancellation is for any other reason, it shall be effective 60 days following the date upon which written notice is given the Hauler. 7. The bond posted by Hauler pursuant to Subsection 601.15, • subd. 5 of the Code shall also secure the full and faithful performance of Hauler under this Agreement. 5 • 8. Terms used in this Agreement which are defined in Section 601 of the Code shall have the meanings given therein. HAULER: 'a, L r Dated: (?l _r; Iii` t C • CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its Manager By Its Mayor Dated: (City Seal) --------------------- • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 124 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Council approval of the Southwest Fire League Mutual Aid Agreement. Background: The Southwest Fire League Mutual Aid Association is composed of: Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airport Commission, Minnetonka, Richfield and St. Louis Park. It was formed originally in 1975 and has had few changes since founding. Chanhassen, Plymouth and V.A. Fort Snelling want to join the association. The association's purpose is to make avaiand given six times. Recommended Motion: Approve the Southwest Fire League Mutual Aid Agreement. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The Mutual Aid Agreement allows participating cities to share resources in the event of an emergency that individual cities could not reasonably provide. Adding member cities increases the resources. 2. Broadening the interpretation of "Fire" and "Firefighting Equipment and Personnel" and to allow responses to "any emergency that places life, property or environment at risk or danger" enhances the Fire Division's ability to effectively protect the public. Discussion/Decision Mode: Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a Mutual Aid Agreement with the Southwest Fire League. Respectfully submitted, Jam Prosser Cit Manager JDP:cak • BLOOMINGTON F. D. EDEN PRAIRIE F. D. EDINA F. D. April 23, 1990 Dear Chief: it!!111 11' ' tat"t *7ew Zmvkae ORGANIZED 1949 GOLDEN VALLEY F. D. HOPKINS F. D. METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION F. D. MINNETONKA F. D. RICHFIELD F. D. ST. LOUIS PARK F. D. Please find enclosed a copy of the Southwest Fire League Mutual Aid Agreement. This agreement MUST be signed by your city administrators. The original of the signature page must be returned to the secretary at: George Magdal 1010 1st St. S. Hopkins, MN 55343 In most cases, this agreement is signed by the Mayor and the City-Man- ager. If your organization does not have such figure heads choose someone who is authorized to approve this type of activity for your department. This is the same agreement that was signed by the 9 original member cities back in January of 1975 except for the follow- ing: - Paragraph #1 has been modified to include Chanhassen, Plymouth, and VA Fort Snelling. - A new paragraph, 5a has been added. This paragraph was -y signed off by your city in 1980. - 2 new paragraphs, 17 & 18, have been added. These were approved at the January 1990 Southwest Fire League meeting. I will send you a complete document with copies of all the signatures as soon as I get them all back. The three new members cannot partici- pate in the group until this is completed. If there are any questions, please feel free to call me. number is 939-1321. sincerely yours, George J. Magdal Treasurer/Secretary My telephone 0 South. AGREEMENT - SOUTHWEST MUTUAL AID ASSOCIATION THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between the follow- ing municipal corporations: Bloomington, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie, Edina, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airport Commission Minnetonka, Plymouth, Richfield, St. Louis Park, V.A. Fort Snelling. WHEREAS the said municipalities desire to make available to each other their respective fire-fighting equipment and personnel in the case of emergencies, and each of said municipalities has legal author- ity to send its fire-fighting equipment and personnel into other-com- munities, NOW THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: That in consideration of the mutual covenants, agreements, and undertakings hereinafter set forth each of the parties hereto agrees to furnish fire-fighting assistance to any of the others when called upon by the fire chief or fire department officer in charge of any of the other parties hereto subject to the following conditions to wit: 1. That road and weather conditions must be such that the fire run can be made with reasonable safety to men and equipment, and the decision of the fire chief or other fire department officer in charge, shall be final in such matters. 2. That in the event all of the fire apparatus and all or most of the members of the fire department of any community so called upon for fire assistance by one of the other parties hereto are in use in said community at the time the call comes in from the other party, or in the discretion of the fire chief or other fire department officers r ,? JG-3 -2- in charge may be needed in said community, the said community shall be held free and relieved from all liability to make said run or to respond to said call. 3. That in the event any apparatus and members of the fire de- partment of any community engaged in fire fighting for the benefit of the party calling for assistance or in response to a call from said party, shall be needed to fight fire or for any other purpose in its own community, that apparatus and the members of said fire department may and shall be recalled to its own community before completing-the fire fighting for the other party and said assisting party shall-be held free from any liability to continue fighting said fire. 4. If one or more fires occur within the limits of any of the above municipalities or within the limits of any territory in which any of said municipalities has contracted to furnish fire-fighting equipment and personnel, and the fire-fighting equipment or personnel of any of the municipalities executing this contract is, in the judgment of the chief of its fire department or in his absence his assistant or deputy in charge of its fire department, insufficient to control or extinguish the fire or fires, an "emergency" shall exist for the purposes of this agreement. 5. If an emergency arises, any of the persons who are entitled by paragraph 1 above to determine an emergency may call upon the fire department of one or more of the municipalities above named, which are adjacent, for assistance. If all the fire-fighting equipment and per- 0 eI C-+ sonnel of any of said municipalities is engaged in fighting fire, the chief or other commanding officer of the fire department of any other such municipality whose fire-fighting equipment is not engaged in fighting fire shall send equipment and personnel to the empty fire station to be available for call if required for any fire. It is the intention of the parties by this agreement to cooperate in the event of an emergency by making available necessary fire fighting equipment and personnel from the nearest fire stations and during such an emer- gency to rearrange fire-fighting equipment of the parties so as to make the remaining equipment and personnel available for use in`-the event other fires shall occur anywhere throughout the territory of these municipalities. 5a. When'in the opinion of the local Fire Chief, Fire Marshal or Fire Investigator, there is a fire incident in their community that needs additional trained investigative assistance, they shall be-able to call on the participating departments to this agreement to get assistance of their trained investigator. This mutual aid-service is designed to supplement, not replace the services of the State Fire Marshal's Office or the Arson Investigation Unit of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Department or any like agency. 6. Upon receipt of a call for assistance as set forth in para- graph 5, the fire department of any of the parties hereto shall promptly dispatch at least one fire truck with the usual number of personnel to assist in fighting the fire which has caused the emer- gency or to render stand-by service as the case may be, provided that i -4- no fire department of any of said parties shall be obligated to send its fire equipment or personnel beyond its boundaries if to do so would leave such municipality without any fire equipment or personnel available within its limits for service at any fire which might sub- sequently arise within. In extreme emergencies, however, every effort will be made to redistribute fire-fighting equipment and personnel so as to make it available for any additional fires which might arise during the emergency. 7. The fire-fighting equipment and personnel of any fire depart- ment assisting the fire department of another municipality in an emergency will immediately upon arrival at the scene of the emergency be under the command of the officer in charge for the municipality within whose boundaries the emergency is situated. 8. No charge shall be made by any party for assistance rendered to another party under this agreement except; Each community ans"ring a call for assistance from any other party hereto shall be paid for the cost of all fire extinguishing materials used in said-call, the cost of fuel consumed by the fire apparatus, cost of the meals for firemen, and any other miscellaneous cost involved with said assistance. Salaries excluded. 9. Each of the parties will maintain insurance policies cover- ing: (a) Accidental death of firemen in the minimum amount of $3,000 on the life of each fireman who is a member of said party's fire department, the coverage of said policy extending to X -cam -5- protect said firemen of said parties when engaged in the performance of duties under this agreement outside the bound- ary of the party of whose fire department he is a member, and (b) Damage or injury caused by negligent operation of its fire department vehicles to the extent of $5,000 property lia- bility, and $25,000 personal injury liability, the coverage of such policies extending to accidents which may occur while the said party's fire department is engaged in the perfor- mance of duties under this agreement outside of the bound- aries of said party. 10. No party to this agreement nor any officer or employee of any party shall be liable to another party or to any person on account of failure of any party to this agreement to furnish its fire-fighting equipment or personnel in response to a call for assistance from any other municipality. 11. While each party in answering a call from some other party hereto shall attempt to furnish a reasonable number of firemen on each piece of equipment answering such call, the discretion of the fire chief or other fire department officer in charge of the equipment and department of said party shall be final as to the number of firemen that can be spared. 12. That in event of fire calls from two or more communities or parties hereto, the first call shall have priority and the second call shall be answered as soon as possible, it being understood between all e ? c -,I -6- the parties hereto that property within the limits of each community shall have first call on the services of its own fire department. 13. No liability shall be incurred by a party who shall have summoned assistance under this agreement for damage to, or destruction of, fire-fighting equipment of a party rendering such assistance unless such damage or destruction shall be caused by negligent or mal- icious conduct of any officer or employee of the party which has summoned such assistance. 14. That the governing body of each party hereto will appoint the Chief of the Fire Department of his community to serve as a member of an association formed for the purpose of furthering the purposes of this agreement and increasing the efficiency of the fire-fighting ser- vices of theses municipalities by exchange of information, standard- ization of equipment, education of personnel , perfection of methods of fire alarms throughout the territory of these municipalities and such other matters as will serve to mutually assist these municipalities in the prevention and extinguishment of fires. 15. Any party hereto may withdraw from this agreement by thirty days notice in writing to the others. 16. A copy of this agreement will be posted at the fire depart- ment headquarters of each party hereto. Subject to all of the above conditions, each of the parties hereto agrees to make every reasonable effort to attend fires in any of the other communities mentioned herein when such assistance is requested as above provided. • -7- I 17. The term, "fire" or "fire fighting assistance", as used within this agreement, shall also include any emergency that places life, property or environment at risk or danger. 18. The term, "firefighting equipment and personnel", as used within this agreement, shall also include any fire, medical emergency, rescue, or specialized equipment (or) personnel capable of providing assistance. • • -IC -9 -8- IN WITNESS WHEREOF the said municipalities have caused this agreement to be signed in their respective corporate names by their respective duly authorized officers by authority of their respective governing bodies as of this day of , 19 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON • By: By: CITY OF CHANHASSEN By: By: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By: By: CITY OF EDINA By: By: CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY By: By: CITY OF HOPKINS By: By: , CITY OF MINNETONKA By: By: MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN AIRPORT COMM. By: CITY OF PLYMOUTH By By CITY OF RICHFIELD By: Mayor By: City Manager CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK By: By: VA FORT SNELLING FIRE DEPT. By: By : 0 ''? I D CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 125. Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Application for a community celebration event license with a request for a fee waiver by the Fourth of July Committee for events scheduled to take place on July 4, 1990. Background: Each year the Fourth of July Committee makes application for a community celebration event license and requests that the fee be waived for the activities that take place throughout the City on July 4, 1990. A detailed activity plan of the day's events is currently on file. A copy of the Committee's bylaws and articles of incorporation are also on file. The food concessions will be staffed by members of nonprofit organizations who have been with the Committee since the celebration began. Any proceeds of the concessions are used for community programs. No other outside vendors will be allowed to sell at a concession. The Committee has contacted food sanitarians from the City of _ Bloomington to ensure that proper food handling practices are followed. They will work with Bloomington sanitarians and follow their recommendations for safe and wholesome food handling. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends the approval of a community celebration event license for the Fourth of July Committee for activities held throughout the day on July 4, 1990. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with all of the provisions of the City application process and meets the requirements for fee waived. Alternatives Recommendation: 1. The Council could decide not to grant the license. This would result in the applicant not being able to conduct activities, especially those concerning food preparation, on the 4th of July. Discussion/Decision Mode: Consideration of the request for the issuance and fee waiver of a community celebration event license for July 4, 1990 for the Fourth of July Committee is presented at this time. Respect ully submitted, <29 Jam D. Prosser Ci anager JDP:cak CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 126 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: City Council appointment of student members to the Richfield Human Rights Commission. Background: The City Ordinance provides for membership structure to the Human Rights Commission. The membership structure includes two student representatives. All appointments to the Human Rights Commission, including the student positions, must be made by the City Council. Two students have expressed an interest in serving on this Commission. They were also recommended by the Richfield School personnel. The students are: Susie VandenBurg Casey Kenyon Both are students at Richfield High School and attended the May Human Rights Commission meeting. Recommended Motion: Confirm the appointment of Susie VandenBurg and Casey Kenyon to the Human Rights Commission as student representatives. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Both students have expressed a strong interest in serving on the Commission. 2. Both students were recommended by the Richfield High School Principal, Richard Maas. 3. City Ordinance establishes two student memberships to the -? Commission. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not appoint these two students and seek other students for appointment. Discussion/Decision Mode: Appointment is desired at the May 14 City Council meeting so that the students could officially be members of the Commission before the next meeting in early June. Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City anager JDP:ff -it 9 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 127 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: A disciplinary hearing on Chi Chi's Mexican Restaurante located at 7717 Nicollet Avenue South. The hearing is necessary as a result of alleged sales of liquor to minors on three occasions in March of 1990. Background: In March of 1990, staff requested that the Police Division conduct an investigation of the City's liquor and beer establishments to determine whether problems existed with minors being served alcohol. On March 22, 1990, the Police Division made arrangements for a 19 year old minor to enter Chi Chi's Mexican Restaurante with undercover police officers. The group, including the minor, were served beer by three different employees of the establishment - without the employees requesting any identification. The minor did not consume any of the beer. On April 9, 1990, the three employees involved and the establishment were charged with a gross misdemeanor for furnishing alcohol to persons underage. The first court hearing on the criminal charges is scheduled for May 1, 1990. On April 20, 1990, staff and the City Attorney met with the Chairman, Sr. Vice-President, Manager of the establishment and their attorney. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the allegations and to arrive at a possible disposition. At that time, the corporate officers present agreed to a stipulation that the establishment be fined a total of $6,000. The stipulation has been signed by the Licensee. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council fine Chi Chi's Mexican Restaurante in the amount of $6,000. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Staff and City Attorney have met with the corporate officers, manager and their attorney and stressed the seriousness of the matter. The following are the steps that Chi Chi's management has taken since the incidents to assure that this does not occur again. They are as follows: - Dismissed the three employees involved in the incidents. Disciplined the on-duty managers. Conducted a round table with all managers to stress the importance of alcohol service procedures. Instituted a hand stamping program. Refresher training related to the Guest Alcohol Policy, it 9-1 the licensing of servers, and refresher viewing of the "Alcohol and the Server" tapes have been tied into the payroll system. This will permit easier monitoring that every employee is up to date in their familiarity with the establishment's liquor service program and policies. An anonymous shopper program is being used to confirm compliance on a spot basis. 2. Corporate officers and the establishment manager have agreed to the stipulations set forth in the attached document and have signed the agreement. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide to revoke the liquor license for Chi Chi's Mexican Restaurante. This would mean that no liquor could be served at any time in the establishment. 2. The City Council could decide to fine the establishment for an amount different than the recommended $6,000 stated in this letter. 3. The City Council could decide to suspend the _ establishment's liquor license for a period of time to be decided by the Council. This would mean that the establishment would be unable to serve any alcoholic beverages for the number of days that the license is suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: Disciplinary hearing on Chi Chi's Mexican Restaurante is scheduled for May 14, 1990. Respect lly submitted, _ Jam s D. Prosser Cit anager JDP:cak 0 1-1 g_,;? CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO DISCIPLINE OF LICENSE AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF STIPULATION (CHI-CHI'S - 7717 NICOLLET AVE. S.) WHEREAS, a license permitting the on -sale sale of intoxicating liquor for calendar year 1990 was approved by this Council on ; and WHEREAS, upon proper and sufficient notice this Council has considered the proposed discipline of such license based upon alleged illegal sales to a minor on March 22, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that substantial and unrebutted evidence establishes that such sales were, in fact, made; and WHEREAS, such sales subject the on-sale intoxicating liquor license held by Chi-Chi's to discipline; and WHEREAS, the Council has been presented with a proposed stipulation ("Stipulation"), is familiar with its contents and has received the recommendation of staff that such be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 below, such 1990 on-sale license is hereby disciplined in the manner provided in the stipulation. 2. The Stipulation is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby directed to execute same on behalf of the City. Once executed, the provisions of the Stipulation shall govern the terms and conditions of the discipline authorized by paragraph 1 above. is i Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, `? this day of , 1990. CITY OF RICHFIELD Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk RC160-006 • • 2 _?_ 2_? 0 STIPULATION THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the day of , 1990, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Chi-Chi's, (hereinafter "Licensee"). BACKGROUND 1. Licensee operates a restaurant located at 7717 Nicollet Ave. S., Richfield, Minnesota. 2. In conjunction with the restaurant operations, licensee holds a license permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor. The license was issued by the City on , 1990, and by its terms expires at the end of 1990. 3. Pending before the City Council is the proposed discipline of Licensee's license based upon alleged sales of alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21 years. 4. Representatives of the Richfield Department of Public Safety have met with the Licensee and Licensee's attorney for the purpose of discussing the allegations and a possible disposition of the matter. STIPULATION Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. The City hereby imposes upon Licensee and Licensee hereby accepts a civil fine of $6,000. 2. Such fine shall be paid in full not later than June 1, 1990. 3. By accepting the above-described discipline, Licensee specifically waives and releases any claims which it may have, for any reason, to challenge the l?] actions of the City which are the subject of this Stipulation, or to challenge the findings of the City Council regarding the alleged illegal sales of alcoholic beverages to a person under 21 years of age; provided, however, that this waiver and release shall not be construed in any way to constitute an admission by Licensee regarding such sales, may not be introduced in any criminal proceeding as evidence of an admission, and shall not preclude Licensee, in any such criminal proceedings, from imposing any defense including, but not limited to a denial that such sales occurred. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its Mayor By Its City Manager CHI-CHI'S By Its By Attorney for Licensee RC160-006 C 2 jtl? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 128 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: A disciplinary hearing on Ground Round Restaurant located at 1500 East 78th Street. The hearing is the result of alleged sales of liquor to minors on two occasions in March of 1990. Background: In March of 1990, staff requested that the Police Division conduct an investigation of the City's liquor and beer establishments to determine whether problems existed with minors being served alcohol. On March 27, 1990, the Police Division made arrangements for an 18 year old minor to enter the Ground Round Restaurant with undercover police officers. The group, including the minor were served alcohol by two different employees of the establishment without the employees requesting any identification. The minor did not consume any of the alcohol. On April 9, 1990, the two employees involved and the establishment were charged with a gross misdemeanor for furnishing alcohol to persons underage. The first court hearing on the criminal charges is scheduled for May 1, 1990. . On April 18, 1990, staff and the City Attorney met with the general manager, assistant general manager and regional director of the establishment and their attorney. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the allegations and to arrive at a possible disposition of the matter. At that time, company representatives and their attorney agreed to a stipulation that- the establishment be fined a total of $3,000. The stipulation has been signed by company management representatives. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council fine Ground Round Restaurant in the amount of $3,000. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Staff and city Attorney have met with the company's management staff and their attorney and have stressed the seriousness of the matter. The following are the steps that Ground Round Restaurant has taken since the incidents to assure that this does not occur again. They are as follows: - Identification is requested of anyone who appears to be 30 years of age or younger. Prior to the incidents, they were checking identification of any- one who appeared to be younger than 25 years of age. - Pre-meal meetings are held with each shift and proper identification is stressed at these meetings. This I/ q ,t is also addressed in an employee handbook and stressed during the employee's training with a video. A quality shopping service that the corporation employs to self-check the establishment has been accelerated and has added questions concerning the sale of liquor to minors and procedures for identification of patrons. - Additional signage has been added at the entrance to the lounge and restaurant concerning the restaurant's identification policies. A fifth manager has been added to the staff so that a better job of policing can be done by the management staff. Increasingly severe disciplinary actions will be taken against any employee found to have neglected to ask for proper identification. 2. The management of the establishment and corporation have agreed to the stipulations set forth in the attached document and have signed the agreement. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide to revoke the liquor license for the Ground Round Restaurant. This would mean that no liquor could be served at any time in the establishment. 2. The City Council could decide to fine the establishment for an amount different than the recommended $3,000 stated in the stipulation. 3. The City Council could decide to suspend the establishment's liquor license for a period of time to be decided by the Council. This would mean that the establishment would be_ unable to serve any alcoholic beverages for the number of days that the license is suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: Disciplinary hearing on the Ground Round Restaurant is scheduled for May 14, 1990. Res tfully submitted, J m s D. Prosser C y Manager JDP:cak 0 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO DISCPINE OF LICENSE AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF STIPULATION (GROUND ROUND, INC. - 1500 EAST 78TH STREET) WHEREAS, a license permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor for calendar year 1990 was approved by this Council on ; and WHEREAS, upon proper and sufficient notice this Council has considered the proposed discipline of said license based upon alleged illegal sales to a minor on March 27, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that substantial and unrebutted evidence establishes that such sales were, in fact, made; and WHEREAS, such sales subject the 1990 intoxicating liquor license issued to Ground Round, Inc. to discipline; and WHEREAS, the Council has been presented with a proposed stipulation ("Stipulation"), is familiar with its contents and has received the recommendation of staff that such be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 below, such 1990 on-sale license is hereby disciplined in the manner provided in the stipulation. 2. The Stipulation is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby directed to execute same on behalf of the City. Once executed, the provisions of the Stipulation shall govern the terms and conditions of the discipline authorized by paragraph 1 above. 0 Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of , 1990. CITY OF RICHFIELD Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk RC160-006 • 2 0 STIPULATION THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the day of , 1990, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Ground Round, Inc. (hereinafter "Licensee"). BACKGROUND 1. Licensee operates a restaurant located at 1500 East 78th Street, Richfield, Minnesota. 2. In conjunction with the restaurant operations, licensee holds a license permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor. The license was issued by the City on , 1990, and by its terms expires at the end of 1990. 3. Pending before the City Council is the proposed discipline of Licensee based upon alleged sales of alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21 years. 4. Representatives of the Richfield Department of Public Safety have met with the Licensee and Licensee's attorney for the purpose of discussing the allegations and a possible disposition of the matter. STIPULATION Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. The City hereby imposes upon Licensee and Licensee hereby accepts a civil fine of $3,000. 2. Such fine shall be paid in full not later than August 15, 1990. 3. By accepting the above-described discipline, Licensee specifically waives • and releases any claims which it may have, for any reason, to challenge the actions of the City which are the subject of this Stipulation, or to challenge the findings of the City Council regarding the alleged illegal sale of alcoholic beverages to a person under 21 years of age; provided, however, that this waiver and release shall not be construed in any way to constitute an admission by Licensee regarding such sale, may not be introduced in any criminal proceeding as evidence of an admission, and shall not preclude Licensee, in any such criminal proceedings, from imposing any defense including, but not limited to a denial that such sale occurred. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RICHFIELD . By Its Mayor By Its City Manager GROUND ROUND, INC. y By Its By Attorney for Licensee RC160-006 • 2 :? (o CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 129 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Disciplinary hearing for Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies located at 2310 West 66th Street. The hearing is necessary as a result of an alleged sale of alcohol to minors on one occasion in March of 1990. Background: In March of 1990, staff requested the Police Division conduct an investigation of the City's liquor and beer establishments to determine whether problems existed with minors being served alcohol. On March 27, 1990, the Police Division made arrangements for an 18 year old minor to enter Davanni's restaurant with undercover police officers. The group, including the minor was served alcohol by an employee of the establishment without the employee requesting any identification. The minor did not consume any of the alcohol. On April 9, 1990, the employee involved and the establishment were charged with a gross misdemeanor for furnishing alcohol to persons underage. The first court hearing on the criminal charges is scheduled for May 1, 1990. On April 18, 1990, staff and the City Attorney met with the manager and president of the establishment and their attorney. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the allegations and to arrive at a possible disposition of the matter. At that time, the owner of the establishment and his attorney agreed to a stipulation that the establishment's license be suspended for a period of two consecutive days. The stipulation has been signed by the owner. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council suspend the wine and non- intoxicating malt liquor license for Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies for two consecutive days. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Staff and City Attorney have met with the company's management staff, President and their attorney and have stressed the seriousness of the matter. The following are the steps that Davanni's restaurant has taken since the incident to assure that this does not occur again. They are as follows: - Additional signs have been placed in the establishment which indicate that anyone who appears to be 30 or younger will be asked for their identification. Flo-I An article concerning the recent incidents has been placed in the employees monthly newsletter as a reminder to employees that selling alcohol is a serious responsibility. All employees have been spoken to by management staff concerning the incidents on a one-to-one basis. An employee is now stationed in the dining room at all times to report any problems to the manager concerning the consumption of alcohol by minors. Additional language will be added to the employee handbook specific to termination policies concerning the sale of alcohol to minors. 2. The management of the establishment and the president of the establishment have agreed to the stipulations set forth in the attached document and have signed the agreement. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide to revoke the wine and non- intoxicating malt liquor license for Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies. This would mean that no wine or non-intoxicating malt liquor could be served at any time in the establishment. • 2. The City Council could decide to fine the establishment in a dollar amount to be determined by the Council. 3. The City Council could decided to suspend the establishment's wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor license for a period of time different than the recommended two days stated in the stipulation. Discussion/Decision Mode: Disciplinary hearing on Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies is scheduled for May 14, 1990. Respe ly submitted, Jame Prosser City Dger JDP:cak 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUSPENDING WINE AND NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENCE AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF STIPULATION (DIVANNI'S RESTAURANT - 2310 WEST 66TH STREET) WHEREAS, licenses permitting the on-sale sale of wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor for the calendar year 1990 were approved by this Council on ; and WHEREAS, upon proper and sufficient notice this Council has considered the proposed discipline of said licenses based upon an alleged illegal sale to a minor on March 27, 1990; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that substantial and unrebutted evidence establishes that such sale was, in fact, made; and WHEREAS, such sales subject to licenses issued to Divanni's to discipline; and WHEREAS, the Council has been presented with a proposed stipulation ("Stipulation"), is familiar with its contents and has received the recommendation of staff that such be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 below, such 1990 on-sale licenses are hereby disciplined in the manner provided in the stipulation. 2. The Stipulation is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby directed to execute same on behalf of the City. Once executed, the provisions of the Stipulation shall govern the terms and conditions of the discipline authorized by paragraph 1 above. 3. The provisions contained in Resolution No. 7252 adopted by the Council on November 10, 1986, remain in full force and effect; and are unaltered by this • action of the Council. ?1 D-3 Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of , 1990. CITY OF RICHFIELD Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk RC160-006 • • 2 *lo_? 0 STIPULATION THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the day of , 1990, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Divanni's Restaurant, 2310 West 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota, (hereinafter "Licensee"). BACKGROUND 1. Licensee operates a restaurant located at 2310 West 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota. 2. In conjunction with the restaurant operations, licensee holds a license permitting the on-sale sale of wine and non -intoxicating malt liquor. The license was issued by the City on 1990, and by its terms expires at the end of 1990. 3. Pending before the City Council is the proposed discipline of Licensee based upon an alleged sale of non-intoxicating malt liquor to persons under the age of 21 years. 4. Representatives of the Richfield Department of Public Safety have met with the Licensee and Licensee's attorney for the purpose of discussing the allegations and a possible disposition of the matter. STIPULATION Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. The City hereby imposes upon Licensee and Licensee hereby accepts a TWO DAY suspension of Licensee's 1990 on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses. 0 4- It -S 2. Said suspension shall occur on two consecutive business days and shall begin 0 not later than May 21, 1990. Licensee shall notify the Department of Public Safety of the actual beginning date of the suspension period not later than two days prior to such actual beginning date. 3. By accepting the above-described discipline, Licensee specifically waives and releases any claims which it may have, for any reason, to challenge the actions of the City which are the subject of this Stipulation, or to challenge the findings of the City Council regarding the alleged illegal sale of alcoholic beverages to a person under 21 years of age; provided, however, that this waiver and release shall not be construed in any way to constitute an admission by Licensee regarding such sale, may not be introduced in any criminal proceeding as evidence of an admission, and shall not preclude Licensee, in any such criminal proceedings, from imposing any defense including, but not limited to a denial that such sale occurred. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its Mayor By Its City Manager DIVANNI'S RESTAURANT By Its By Attorney for Licensee RC 160-006 2 til 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 130 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: A disciplinary hearing on Champps Sports Bar of Richfield located at 790 West 66th Street. The hearing is necessary as a result of the alleged sale of liquor to minors on three occasions in March of 1990. Background: In March of 1990, staff requested that the Police Division conduct an investigation of the City's liquor and beer establishments to determine whether problems existed with minors being served alcohol. On March 22, 1990, the Police Division made arrangements for a 19 year old minor to enter Champps Sports Bar of Richfield with undercover police officers. The group, including the minor were served alcohol by three different employees of the establishment without the employees requesting any identification. The minor did not consume any of the alcohol. On April 9, 1990, the three employees involved and the establishment were charged with a gross misdemeanor for furnishing alcohol to persons underage. The first court hearing on the criminal charges is scheduled for May 1, 1990. On April 20, 1990, staff and the City Attorney met with the owner, the manager of the establishment and their attorney. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the allegations and to arrive at a possible disposition. At that time, the owner and manager agreed to a stipulation that the establishment be fined a total of $6,000. The stipulation has been signed by the Licensee. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends that the City Council fine Champps Sports Bar of Richfield in the amount of $6,000. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Staff and City Attorney have met with the owner, manager and their attorney and stressed the seriousness of the matter. The following are the steps that Champps Sports Bar of Richfield has taken since the incidents to assure that this does not occur again. They are as follows: Their carding policy now includes be thirty years of age or younger. carding anyone who appeared to be age or younger. - The signage at the entrance to the been increased. The quality shopping service that anyone who appears to They were previously twenty-four years of establishment has the establishment Jii-1 employs to self-check the restaurant has focused not only on food but on liquor as well. This will continue to be the case in the future. An emergency meeting was held with all management and serving staff involved. Responsible liquor sales and proper identification procedures were stressed. The servers involved were suspended for one week. There are daily pre-shift communications with employees regarding proper identification and responsible liquor sales. Servers are required to view a video tape on liquor sales and identification procedures and are tested on the material. Servers may not work until they have been tested on the material and have passed. 2. The owner and establishment manager have agreed to the stipulations set forth in the attached document and have signed the agreement. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council could decide to revoke the liquor license for Champps Sports Bar of Richfield. This would mean that no liquor could be served at any time in the establishment. 2. The City Council could decide to fine the establishment for an amount different than the recommended $6,000 stated in this letter. 3. The City Council could decide to suspend the establishment's liquor license for a period of time to be decided by the Council. This would mean that the establishment would be unable to serve any alcoholic beverages for the number of days that the license is suspended. Discussion/Decision Mode: Disciplinary hearing on Champps Sports Bar of Richfield is scheduled for May 14, 1990. Respec y submitted, James c Prosser City Manager JDP:cak -? 11 ,/, CITY OF RICHFIELD RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO DISCIPLINE OF LICENCE AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF STIPULATION (CHAMPPS - 790 WEST 66TH STREET) WHEREAS, a license permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor for calendar year 1990 was approved by this Council on ; and WHEREAS, upon proper and sufficient notice this Council has considered the proposed discipline of said license based upon alleged illegal sales of alcoholic beverages to a minor on March 22, 1990; and _ WHEREAS, the Council finds that substantial and unrebutted evidence establishes that such sales were, in fact, made; and WHEREAS, such sales subject the on-sale intoxicating liquor license held by Champps to discipline; and WHEREAS, the Council has been presented with a proposed stipulation ("Stipulation"), is familiar with its contents and has received the recommendation of staff that such be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 below, such 1990 on-sale license is hereby disciplined in the manner provided in the stipulation. 2. The Stipulation is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby directed to execute same on behalf of the City. Once executed, the provisions of the Stipulation shall govern the terms and conditions of the discipline authorized by paragraph 1 above. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of , 1990. 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD Steven J. Quam, Mayor • ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk RC160-006 0 t 114 0 STIPULATION THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of the day of , 1990, by and between the City of Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation (here inafter. "City") and Champps, (hereinafter "Licensee"). BACKGROUND 1. Licensee operates a restaurant located at 790 West 66th Street, Richfield, Minnesota. 2. In conjunction with the restaurant operations, licensee holds a license permitting the on-sale sale of intoxicating liquor. The license was issued by the City on 1990, and by its terms expires at the end of 1990. 3. Pending before the City Council is the proposed discipline of Licensee based upon alleged sales of alcoholic beverages to a person under the age of 21 years. 4. Representatives of the Richfield Department of Public Safety have met with the Licensee and Licensee's attorney for the purpose of discussing the allegations and a possible disposition of the matter. STIPULATION Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties as follows: 1. The City hereby imposes upon Licensee and Licensee hereby accepts a civil fine of $6,000. 2. The fine described in paragraph 1 above is to be paid in full not later than June 1, 1990. 0 i?- 11-67 3. By accepting the above-described discipline, Licensee specifically waives • and releases any claims which it may have, for any reason, to challenge the actions of the City which are the subject of this Stipulation, or to challenge the findings of the City Council regarding the alleged illegal sales of alcoholic beverages to a person under 21 years of age; provided, however, that this waiver and release shall not be construed in any way to constitute an admission by Licensee regarding such sales, may not be introduced in any criminal proceeding as evidence of an admission, and shall not preclude Licensee, in any such criminal proceedings, from imposing any defense including, but not limited to a denial that such sales occurred. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the day and year first above written. • • CITY OF RICHFIELD By Its Mayor By Its City Manager CHAMPPS By Its By Attorney for Licensee RC160-006 2 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 131 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Amendment to anoffstreet parking permit at 1532 East 66th Street. Background: An offstreet parking permit was initially issued in 1959 to Clinton Press at 1524 East 66th Street. The permit was amended on February 13, 1968 to allow a building expansion and modification of the parking area. The Building Inspection Office noted that the parking area has now encroached on the adjoining lot in order to obtain maneuvering room for parkers. A further amendment is necessary to bring the parking area into conformity. Recommended Motion: Approve the request for an amendment to the offstreet parking permit with the following stipulations: 1. A drainage plan be approved by staff. 2. There be additional screening along the east line of the parking area. 3. The curb cut be widened to at least 261-0" and no more than 32'-0". 4. One parking space be designated for handicapped parking. 5. The revised parking layout be approved by staff. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The proposal does not substantially change the use or character of the site. The expanded parking area will improve the operational aspects of the parking lot. 2. The City Code states that "No driveway from private property servicing a commercial, multifamily, or industrial use entering a public street may be less than 26 feet nor more than 32 feet in width." 3. The City code states that "A parking area adjoining or adjacent to any residential or multiple resident shall be effectively screened from the district by a fence, wall, or compact hedge, or a combination thereof." 4. There is adequate space to keep the same number of parking spaces on the overall site. E Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council may deny the offstreet parking permit amendment if a finding of fact determines that the amendment would have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is scheduled for Council action on May 14, 1990. Notice was mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property. Respectf lly submitted, Ja a D. Prosser Ci Manager JDP:cak • • • Z 0 O J • W W F1.t. a W N CV) L T » ? r NSIONr1S wzz 11 la L_ VIOZ C? V181 _? MO'i13lONOl '3AV ar--- Yi81 - ?? Y111 4191 i NO1pNIN001B 4191 Y/rl ? V/ SI VI ZI ? C I I YI II I .J Y101 II 101113 ?I oov3lwo I snawmo3 , xavd I '-; ONrlxro I tilt 1Ar ONrlltl0d 11 YI r :I NOIN110 I^Ip, Olt I ruZ it I SN3A31S Lei, '3Ar 1311001N 1130SIr16 I I I L III N1tlOM1N3M Aan6Sllld ', tC II 1NVSr31d Iq? ;?---- oNvao I I 131atlrw 0131ltlV3 '3Ar 31TONAI }}?yy!!f NOlaaly 1NVAae xrlloo LNodno II \ ' NOSa3N3 1NORAW 1 aavalo II 1a109NAm 9NIAa1. s3err )I - xONx V NO01 ?? •- J' lovamon NalA13N a3A110 '3Ar NN3d T? N33n0 ' 113SSna NVala3wS SVNON1 ?r-- NOldn LN30NtA `-_- __ NYnYwSrM - L - AV SMID N N Z = N Vt Vt Q V N N N = _ r ? yyii yy ? V ?? I N N `N - N N L1 N N_ W IL =r??//;??, VI 81 ?? 1 ? I I? Y, 91 91 CCJ ????I `C-ice (I?:O? ?: 41,1 CO CC?Cn CC?C C?C? ???CCCCC?L/.t 41 t1 11, I a00113 W I1 i O I I I I Y I t I II?iCr--t??;; oorolNo Snommoo xard r 3AV H1L L CCi?I 1- awvlxro '3Ar 43Nr11a0d ';`-^ I wt W 't_? ? ?? vl? ` W F- ; NOLN110 `--- '3AV H19t?; o.t i r SN3A31S r x1 1-? 3Ar 1311031N '3AV N01 JNI W OO"lE \? ` 113asir16 r N1aOM1NU CIC? C , Aanaslva 1NrSV31d -ter. 1 t C?? I ONSaO -I?? 3AV H1St 1318tlvw ?V% , tI c =? it 0131iar0 3Ar 31VONAl olvaiv 1NrAae W ` CCICC?iC 114 / la W ?a?L ??t_J ii :rllao 1NOdna cuCC??I _,`_= _,•?' C NCO avmls' laloatnnw SWAMI NOl M3N ?7 113A110 '3Ar NN3d rF F-7, L2 I 113SSna -- i?_ -- - - - - - ?C=??-?li svwoNl MO.Ldn NIA NanYNS VM 3Ar S3xa3x N N N N N N N N_/f N N N N N N N ~ Np Vt V p N b ? ? n w n r I. ? N V• N ? A A Z Y cr Q a ? W W J v a ? v w to W z I '? m Q N ' oz OZ !- J M W 7 ? I I 0? Q O x CO (r O N J = W i- 0) 4) W U) o CD O > C-4 M W f- N 0 17 4p Z c? o Cl) - J ? Q 1 N in I W Cl) N W , th w X U T ? ov , 'OS '3 AV kt /,? -- u j U Z W LL cr O W m 3 0 z cr U m I M N Z5 9Z - u. n yt a s ?, SZi NOIJNIW00-l 8 L I • pia-4 0 N r W I J Q fI U ' N I ?_ - - - - - - 3NIl AIU3d0Hd - - -- -- IW Z J ? I ? Q i- I T ( a N ? I ?J Q IQ I I L I R ai 0 i I NI a 10 I (? I ? I N I of IZ ?, I OI G l? I I ? ? 02_- poz -a CL J - - ? - ? x a -- --r ?- -- -X -- -- -- 0 p is :c mI a I ? 1r-----? ¢I cc cn TI, T I (??OZ o Qa I? = W I + ,5'19 JJ -----I - -?W-?1 =OM B N p I I Z m I K I .f- t ?.:.. Z ...:: 3i1N3" NOlJNIWOO'lB f T in I ean0 - +,9Z I Zo w N m 0 ZONING 1532 EAST HKII I INDUSTRIAL C-2 MR-1 GENERAL COMMERCIAL TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE 66TH STREET MR-2 3 TO 17 UNIT RESIDENCE PC-2 PLANNED GENERAL COMMERCI R SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE doommomm? w v M%" PARK 63 ST. Q ; w U ' ? I ::: ; :• :• 64TH ST. . > Z 10 ui uj ui LL, > > Q Q Q Q Q Z Q - ? F. F- in ?c ? o0 ' ? r m r r H S 67T i t w Q 2 Q O w U LAND USE 1532 EAST 66TH STREET N N W W = I < v I 2 I ? I 65TH ST E N i ui i < I 0 Z z I ? o I I o i JNMIMI ROAD NO. M) >04 >04 cm W COMMERCIAL APARTMENT DUPLEX F-1 SINGLE FAMILY QUASI PUBLIC PARK VACANT N y I F=F:l 67TH 0 c r" of 68TH i to N < I uwi t ti m -t /a-?, N 0 ST E N W ST E ST 1 0 z 3 S W v COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPM ?Jq-7 ENT: PLAN Tot o' 000 ROAD NO. 53) 0000000 u°o°°°0°0°0°0° o° ..00.00 o °o°o°°°o°o°°°o °o 00°000°0000000 00 MIXED LAND USE opopo MEDIUM DENSITY BUFFER INSTITUTIONAL ±:? " PARK SINGLE FAMILY 1532 EAST 66TH STREET N W Q Q I 55TH ST E 4 i < Z O C,7 2 O O O 00 - O °O$o° ° o° °o °o o O 00 0 °O a O _ O - O O O N W I 0 58TH Lane . ¦ ?:•,•a N N • • a ¦ t W ¦ • • • • • • < < • ¦ ¦ aD ¦ • ;i s r s • ST 0000 000'0 ooooo?oooo 0 O°O° ST ST 0 0000 00 O°OQO°O° O°O °p° 000°O°00 00000000 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 p°p°OO° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0- 0 E • s N most now, ... ¦ a r • s • ' ¦ ¦ ¦ Away . . • . . ¦ • ¦ ¦ none ••i ¦••T • • • • ¦ • a s E ¦ • ! • ¦ • ¦ • ¦ a ¦ ! • ¦ • • • ¦ ¦ :::: ¦ .•a•aa - %a..•a • • • • • • - . ¦ . a . a W-W W • • ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ` O O`O`O Q 0+0 O 0 0 0 OHO p 0-0 O J J 0 0000 O°O°O O 5°O°O°O°° 5 0 0°0 D°o o°o° 10000 ?p°p°G p ?o°o o°o ? °0°o°p O O O O D ppp ppp Lp°C°p°p 0000000 to°0000° •.•t cD .. ?n ¦ . a . ...? c ••a, W A;L hn to • • v a 9-- A1116 (COUNTY 67T H et /3 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 132 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Public hearing and second reading of an ordinance amendment to Chapter I, Subsection 115.11, adding Subdivision 6 - "Youth Resource Specialist." Background: The Department of Public Safety has recently added a new civilian position of Youth Resource Specialist. This position assists the Police Division in handling juvenile cases and school liaison functions. This position works primarily with children in need of protective services, diverting juveniles from more extensive involvement in the Juvenile Justice System and prevents occurrence of delinquent behavior by developing, implementing and participating in prevention programs that provide for the best interests of children and community. This person will be responsible for issuing citations for juvenile status offenses, such as runaway, truancy and tobacco use. This person will also be responsible for issuing citations for juvenile petty misdemeanors such as the use of alcohol or controlled substances. Other cities, such as Crystal, have similar positions and have adopted similar ordinance amendments to allow for the issuing of citations for these limited violations by juveniles by this position. Recommended Motion: Approve second reading of an ordinance amendment to Chapter I, Subsection 115.11, adding Subdivision 6 - "Youth Resource Officer." Basis for Recommendation: This ordinance addition should effectively provide the Youth Resource Specialist with the authority to issue citations to juvenile status offense violators. Alternative Recommendation: Not approve second reading of this ordinance amendment/addition. Discussion/Decision Mode: The public hearing and second reading has been scheduled for the May 14, 1990 City Council meeting. Respectf y submitted, osser Jame Tanager City, a0 JDP:cak t- l3 -i BILL NO. 1990- AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER I OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Chapter I, Subsection 115.11 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "Enforcement" is hereby amended by adding the following new subdivision. Subd. 6. Youth Resource Specialist. A person holding the position of Youth Resource Specialist in the Police Division may, under the direction of the Public Safety Director, issue citations in lieu of arrest for juvenile status offenses and petty misdemeanors, but may not take persons into custodv for refusal to sign such citations. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, 0 Minnesota this day of . 1990. Steven J. Quam, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk 0 ?-- I ? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 133 Agenda, May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Consideration of public hearing and second reading of a proposed ordinance to authorize the City to levy a lodging tax and establish a Richfield Tourism Promotion Board. Background: The owners •of the Hampton Inn Hotel have requested that the City consider establishing a Richfield Tourism Promotion Board. The purpose of the Board would be to provide promotion of Richfield with emphasis on the use of Richfield hotels and motels. The activities of the Board would be funded by a portion of a lodging tax to be levied by the City of Richfield in accordance with the request of the Hampton Inn Hotel. Minnesota Statute Section 169.190 authorizes the City to impose a tax of up to 6% on the gross receipts of lodging from motels and hotels. Of the taxes received, the law requires that 95% of the gross proceeds of the first 3% be used for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center. The remainder of the taxes received may be used by the City for any lawful purpose. The owners of Hampton Inn Hotel have requested that a tax be levied and used to fund a Richfield Tourism Board. Since the first reading of this ordinance, the state legislature has approved a bill which effects the City's ability to pose the 5% tax initially recommended under this ordinance. The new state law limits the maximum tax to 3%. The initial agreement between the Tourism Board and the City contemplated this possibility. The major difference between the 5% and a 3% scenario is that the City would not be able to retain 1%, instead the City will be able to retain only .15%. The principal basis of Hampton Inn's proposal is that a Tourism Board would assist with the marketing of their hotel and their advertised rates. At the present time, Richfield hotels advertise rates which include expenditures for marketing. Many of these expenditures could be made by a Tourism Promotion Board of the City using the proceeds of a lodging tax. Recommended Motion: Approve the establishment of a Richfield Tourism Promotion Board and approve the establishment of a 3% lodging tax. Authorize the City Manager and Mayor to execute an agreement between the City and the Tourism Board. Basis For Recommendation: 1. Hampton Inn has requested the establishment of the Richfield Tourism Board to assist with the marketing of hotels in Richfield. -"/+-i 2. Hampton Inn has contacted the Motel 6 regarding this concept. Motel 6 has not indicated any opposition to this concept. 3. Proceeds from the lodging tax would be used to promote the City resulting with a benefit to merchants, employment, and property values. 4. City Attorney and staff have reviewed the proposals to establish the Tourism Board, including the bylaws of the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board, the Articles of Incorporation, the agreement between the City and the Tourism Board regarding the expenditure of funds. 5. Establishment of the Tourism Board as outlined would not provide a burden to City staff or the Council. 6. While the City will not receive the same amount of funds initially anticipated under this agreement, it is still beneficial to approve the tax in order to provide a climate supportive of hotel industry in our City. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City could decline the request of the Hampton Inn Hotel. 2. City Attorney has stated a concern that the Richfield Tourism Promotion Board could make expenditures with tax dollars which were not authorized because they do not market or promote the City as a tourist center. To address this concern, the City and the Hampton Inn have developed a proposed contract between the City and the Tourism Promotion Board which provides that expenditures of the Board must be in accordance with law and that if the Tourism Board breaches the agreement, it may be terminated by the City on ten (10) days notice. Discussion/Decision Mode: This matter will be presented for public hearing and second reading approval at the Council meeting on May 14, 1990. The Council will be asked to approve the establishment of a Tourism Board, approve the levy of a-3% lodging tax and authorize the City Manager and Mayor to execute an agreement between the Tourism Board and the City to assure proper use of funds. These documents have been previously provided to the Council. Respect ully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit Manager 0 JDP:ff *,rney, at La. ROBF.RI A. AI SOl' Pal 1. 1). BAER IS( IH RONALD H. BAI I.I. MAR) J. BREND1:11 STEPHEN J. BIBLI ROBERT C. CARISON CHRISTINE 11. CILU.E. ROBERT L. D.A%H)SON JOHN B. DI.AN ROBERT J. DEIKE NI %R1 G. DOBBINS JEFFREI F.N'G SIT LI-ANIEN. (;At EN DAl'ID L. GRAAI:N CORRINI: A. HI:INF. JOHN G. HDISCHLF.R JAWS S. HOLNIt S HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED 470 Pillsbun Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 554102 (612) 337-9300 Facsimile (612) 337-9310 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL. 337-9215 DA%11) J. KFNNEDN JOHN R. LARSON N ELIJNG"10% H. 1,A%% it LW. A. I.AN LLR CHARLES L. LF.FE%F.R1: JOHN M. LF.FF.I RF.. JR. ROM'RI J. LINDAI.1. I.AI'RA K. !1101.1.1:1 DAMLL R. NELSON BARBARA L. POR III OOD MARL FRAM LSSKALA JAILS N1. SIRON1%IEN SI I:I FN M. FALLEN JANIESJ. THO VSON. JR. LARRI M. 11LRIIILI%1 BONNII: L. "II.KINS May 4, 1990 Mr. Jim Prosser City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Ave. S. Richfield, MN 55423 Re: Lodging Tax Ordinance Dear Jim: Mr. Brusman and his attorney have requested several changes to the lodging tax ordinance. I have made most of these changes because I do not believe that they result in any material disadvantage to the City. I have also reduced the tax to 3% as required by the 1990 tax bill amendments. An amended draft ordinance is attached. I have also attached an additional copy in which the changes from the last draft which was considered by the City Council are highlighted in yellow. Mr. Brusman has also requested changes to the penalty provisions in Section 1400.10. Basically, Mr. Brusman feels that the ten percent penalty provided in Subdivision 1 is adequate and has requested the deletion of Subdivisions 2 through 5 of that Section. The provisions which Mr. Brusman is objecting to provide for additional penalties the longer the tax remains unpaid and additional penalties for failing to file a return. These provisions also require that interest be paid on penalties and that payments which are received are credited first to penalties, next to interest, and then to the tax due. These provisions are relatively harsh. However, it may be that if the City becomes involved in a collection process, it will incur costs and fees which could equal the amount of the penalties provided in these subdivisions. I do not have a legal objection to reducing these penalty provisions. However, since they are material changes which are not to the advantage of the City, I have not amended the ordinance as requested by Mr. Brusman prior to Council direction to do so. Very truly yours, 0 Charles L. LeFevere CLL:rsr Enclosures cc: Mr. Jonathan Scoll RC145-089 ilif 13 0 BILL NO. 1990 AN ORDINANCE CREATING CHAPTER XIV OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATING TO A TAX IMPOSED UPON LODGING THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: The Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended by adding Chapter XIV, thereof to read as follows: Section 1. Chapter XIV is hereby created as follows: 1400.01. General provisions. Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Chapter, the following terms, phrases and words, and their derivations shall have the meaning given therein. When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely directory. Subd. 2. The term "director" means the Finance Director of the City. Subd. 3. The term "City" means the City of Richfield. Subd. 4. The term "lodging" means the furnishing for a consideration of lodging by a hotel, motel or rooming house except where such lodging shall be for a continuous period of thirty (30) days or more to the same lodger(s). The furnishing of rooms by religious, educational or nonprofit organizations shall not constitute "lodging" for purposes of this Chapter. Subd. 5. The term "operator" means a person who provides lodging to others or any officer, agent or employee of such person. Subd. 6. The term "person" means any individual, corporation, partnership, association, estate, receiver, trustee, executor, administrator, assignee, syndicate, or any other combination of individuals. Whenever the term "person" is used in any provision of this Chapter prescribing and imposing a penalty, the term as applied to a corporation, association, or partnership, shall mean the officers, or partners thereof as the case may be. Subd. 7. The term "rent" means the total consideration valued in money charged for lodging whether paid in money or otherwise, but shall not include any charges for services rendered in connection with furnishing lodging other than the room charge itself. Subd. 8. The term "lodger" means the person obtaining lodging from an operator. E 1400.02. Imposition of tax. There is hereby imposed a tax of three (3%) percent on the rent charged by an operator for providing lodging to any person after the adoption of this ordinance and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. The tax shall be stated and charged separately and shall be collected by the operator from the lodger. The purpose of the tax must be made known to the lodger by either inserting the statement "Proceeds from this tax are used to fund a local convention or tourism bureau" on the lodger's receipt or by posting the statement at the registration desk where it can be clearly seen by the lodger. The tax collected by the operator shall be a debt owed by the operator to the City and shall be extinguished only by payment to the City. In no case shall the tax imposed by this section upon an operator exceed the amount of tax which the operator is authorized and required by this Chapter to collect from a lodger. 1400.03. Collections. Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this Chapter at the time the rent is paid. The tax collections shall be deemed to be held in trust by the operator for the City. The amount of tax shall be separately stated from the rent charged for the lodging. 1400.04. Exceptions and exemptions. No tax shall be imposed on rent for lodging paid by any officer or employee of a foreign government who is exempt by reason of express provisions of federal law or international treaty. Any exemption shall be granted to any person as to whom or whose occupancy it is beyond the power of the City to tax. No exemption shall be granted except upon a claim therefor made at the time the rent is collected, and such a claim shall be made in writing and under penalty of perjury on forms provided by the City. All such claims shall be forwarded to the City when the returns and collections are submitted as required is by this Chapter. 1400.05. Advertising no tax. It shall be unlawful for any operator to advertise or hold out or state to the public or any customer, directly or indirectly, that the tax or any part thereof will be assumed or absorbed by the operator, or that it will not be added to the rent or that, if added, it or any part thereof will be refunded. In computing the tax to be collected, amounts of tax less than one cent shall be considered an additional cent. 1400.06. Payment and returns. The taxes imposed by this Chapter shall be paid by the operator to the City monthly not later than 25 days after the end of the month in which the taxes were collected. At the time of payment the operator shall submit a return upon such form and containing such information as the director may require. The return shall contain the following minimum information. 1. The total amount of rent collected for lodging during the period covered by the return. 2. The amount of tax required to be collected and due for the period. 3. The signature of the person filing the return or that of his agent duly authorized in writing. 4. The period covered by the return. • 2 tax. 5. The amount of uneollectable rental charges subject to the lodging The operator may offset against the taxes payable with respect to any reporting period, the amount of taxes imposed by this Chapter previously paid in any reporting period as a result of any transaction the consideration for which became uneollectable' during such reporting period, but only in proportion to the portion of such consideration which became uneollectable. 1400.07. Examination of returns, adjustments, notices and demands. The director may rely upon the Minnesota sales return filed by the operator with the state of Minnesota in determining the accuracy of a return filed under this ordinance. However, the director shall be authorized to make any investigation or examination of the records and accounts of the person making the return if the director reasonably determines that such steps are necessary for determining the correctness of the return. The tax computed on the basis of such examination shall be the tax to be paid. If the tax due is found to be greater than that paid, such excess shall be paid to the City within ten (10) days after` receipt of a notice thereof, given either personally or sent by registered mail to the address shown on the return. If the tax paid is greater than the tax found to be due, the excess shall be refunded to the person who paid the tax to the City within ten (10) days after determination of such refund. 1400.08. Refunds. Any person may apply to the director for a refund of taxes paid for a prescribed period in excess of the amount legally due for that period, provided that no application for refund shall be considered unless filed within one year after such tax was paid, or within one year from the filing of the return, whichever period is the longer. The director shall examine the claim and make and file written findings thereon denying or allowing the claim in whole or in part and shall mail a notice thereof by registered mail to such person at the address stated upon the return. If such claim is allowed in whole or in part, the director shall credit the amount of the allowance against any taxes due under this Chapter from the claimant and the balance of said allowance, if any, shall be paid by the director to the claimant. 1400.09. Failure to file a return. Subdivision 1. If any operator required by this Chapter to file a return shall fail to do so within the time prescribed, or shall make, willfully or otherwise, an incorrect false, or fraudulent return, the operator shall, upon written notice and demand, file such return or corrected return within five (5) days of receipt of such written notice and shall at the same time pay any tax due on the basis thereof. If such person shall fail to file such return or corrected return, the director shall make a return or corrected return, for such person from such knowledge and information as the director can obtain, and assess a tax on the basis thereof, which tax (less any payments theretofore made on account of the tax for the taxable period covered by such return) shall be paid upon within five (5) days of the receipt of written notice and demand for such payment. Any such return or assessment made by the director shall be prima facie correct and valid, and such person shall have the burden of establishing its incorrectness or invalidity in any action or proceeding in respect thereto. Subd. 2. If any portion of a tax imposed by this Chapter, including penalties thereon, is not paid within thirty (30) days after it is required to be paid, the City 3 0-14- ? Attorney may institute such legal action as may be necessary to recover the amount due plus interest, penalties, the costs and disbursements of any action. Subd. 3. Upon a showing of good cause, the director may grant an operator one thirty (30) days extension of time within which to file a return and make payment of taxes as required by this Chapter provided that interest during such period of extension shall be added to the taxes due (exclusive of any penalty under Section 1400.10) at the rate of ten (10%) percent per annum. 1400.10. Penalty. Subdivision 1. If any tax imposed by this Chapter is not paid within the time herein specified for the payment, or any extension thereof, there shall be added thereto a specific penalty equal to ten (10%) percent of the amount remaining unpaid. Subd. 2. In case of any failure to make and file a return within the time prescribed by this Chapter, unless it is shown that such failure is not due to willful neglect, there shall be added to the tax in addition to the ten (10%) percent specific penalty provided in subdivision 1 above, ten (10%) percent if the failure is for not more than thirty (30) days with an additional five (5%) percent for each additional thirty (30) days or fraction thereof during which such failure continues, not exceeding twenty-five (25%) percent in the aggregate. If the penalty as computed does not exceed $10, a minimum penalty of $10 shall be assessed. The amounts so added to any tax shall be collected at the same time and the same manner and as a part of the tax unless the tax has been paid before the discovery of the negligence, in which case the amount so added shall be collected in the same manner as the tax. Subd. 3. If any person willfully fails to file any return or make any payment required by this Chapter, or willfully files a false or fraudulent return or willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any such a tax or payment thereof, there shall also be imposed as a penalty an amount equal to fifty (50%) percent of any tax (less any amounts paid on the basis of such false or fraudulent return) found due for the period to which such return related. The penalty imposed by this subdivision shall be collected as part of the tax, and shall be in addition to any other penalties provided by this Chapter. Subd. 4. All payments received shall be credited first to penalties, next to interest, and then to the tax due. Subd. 5. The amount of tax not timely paid, together with any penalty provided by this section, shall bear interest at the rate of eight (8%) percent per annum from the time such tax should have been paid until paid. Any interest and penalty shall be added to the tax and be collected as part thereof. 1400.11. Administration of tax. The director shall administer and enforce the assessment and collection of the taxes imposed by this chapter. The director shall cause to be prepared blank forms for the returns and other documents required by this chapter and shall distribute the same throughout the City and furnish them on application, but failure to receive or secure them shall not relieve any person from any obligation required of him under this chapter, unless it can be established that the required forms were not available from the City. • 4 1400.12. Examine records. The director and those persons acting on behalf of the director authorized in writing by the director may examine the books, papers and records of any operator in order to verify the accuracy of any return made, or if no return was made, to ascertain the tax as provided in this chapter. Every such operator is directed and required to give to the said director or to his duly authorized agent or employee the means, facilities and opportunity for such examinations and investigations as are hereby authorized. 11 11 1400.13. Contract with state. The City Manager is authorized to confer with the Minnesota Commissioner of Taxation to the end that an agreement between the City and the Commissioner of Taxation may be entered into for the purpose of providing for the administration and collection of the taxes imposed by this chapter. Such an agreement shall not become effective until presented to the Council for its approval, and when so approved the tax imposed by this chapter shall be collected and administered pursuant to, and in accordance with, the terms of said agreement and of this chapter. 1400.14. Violations. Any person who shall willfully fail to make a return required by this chapter; or who shall fail to pay the tax after written demand for payment; or who shall fail to remit the taxes collected or any penalty or interest imposed by this chapter after written demand for such payment; or who shall refuse to permit the director or any duly authorized agents or employees to examine the books, records and papers under his or her control; or who shall willfully make any incomplete, false or fraudulent return shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 1400.15. Use of proceeds. Proceeds obtained from the collection of taxes pursuant to this chapter shall be used in accordance with the requirements of law. 1400.16. Appeals. Subdivision 1. Any operator aggrieved by any notice, order or determination made by the director under this chapter may file a petition for review of such notice, order or determination detailing the operator's reasons for contesting the notice, order or determination. The petition shall contain the name of the petitioner, the petitioner's address and the location of the lodging subject to the order, notice or determination. Subd. 2. The petition for review shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) working days after the notice, order or determination for which review is sought has been mailed or served upon the person requesting review. Subd. 3. Upon receipt of the petition the City Manager, or his designee, shall set a date for a hearing and give the petitioner at least ten (10) working days prior written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing. Subd. 4. At the hearing, the petitioner shall be given an opportunity to show cause why the notice, order or determination should be modified or withdrawn. The petitioner may be represented by counsel of petitioner's choosing at the petitioner's own expense. Subd. 5. The hearing shall be conducted by the City Manager of his designee, provided only that the person conducting the hearing shall not have participated in the drafting of the order, notice or determination for which review is sought. Subd. 6. The person conducting the hearing shall make written findings of fact and conclusions based upon the applicable sections of this chapter and evidence presented. The person conducting the hearing may affirm, reverse or modify the notice, order or determination made by the director. Subd. 7. Any decision rendered by the City Manager pursuant to this subdivision may be appealed to the City Council. A petitioner seeking to appeal a decision must file a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) working days after the decision has been mailed to the petitioner. The matter will thereupon be placed on the Council agenda as soon as is practical. The Council shall then review the findings of fact and conclusions to determine whether they were correct. Upon a determination by the Council that findings and conclusions were incorrect, the Council may modify, reverse or affirm the decision of the City Manager or his designee upon the same standards as set forth in subdivision 6. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1990. E ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber, City Clerk RC145-038 • CITY OF RICHFIELD By Steven J. Quam - Mayor 6 ?-- 15, CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 134 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: First reading consideration of an ordinance to rezone property located at 6511-13 21st Avenue South from MR-1 to MR-2 multiple residence district. Background: Petitioner, Vincent Seiter, purchased a duplex used as a four unit at 6511-13 21st Avenue South in June, 1988. This property has a long history of non-compliance with the zoning ordinance ever since a duplex was moved onto the property from Minneapolis in 1964. The existing zoning is MR-1 which allows a duplex. The property has never been zoned to allow a four unit and, as a result, there are no "grandfather" rights. The illegal non- conforming use has been noted a number of times by the Council and staff since 1965. A Notice of Non-Compliance dated September 27, 1989 has resulted in this application. Recommendation: Deny the request for an amendment to the zoning ordinance. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The Planning Commission has reviewed and recommends denial of the rezoning. 2. The zoning history clearly indicates illegal non-conformance: • 4/64-Property zoned from R to MR to allow the relocation of a double bungalow onto the site. • 2/65-Two efficiency apartments noted in the lower level of the double bungalow. • 7/65-Planning Commission recommended denial of apartment use permit to allow the efficiency apartments. • 8/65-City Council deferred action on apartment use permit until applicant met with Planning Commission to work out concerns. Applicant did not follow up. • 1982-Zoning Ordinance amended by adding an MR-1 duplex classification for multiple family districts. The site in question was reclassified at this time to MR-1. • 7/83-Letter received from Steve Kahn asking the building inspector for a variance to allow the four unit use of the property. He was informed that there was no provision for such a variance but that he could request a rezoning of the property. He chose not to apply for a rezoning. • 9/27/89-Notice of Non-Compliance. • 3/4/90-Application for zoning change. 3. None of the units appear to meet the minimum square footage per unit requirements. 4. The project is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. -t- 15, 5. The offstreet parking layout does not meet City requirements. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The City Council may recommend approval of the amendment to the zoning ordinance code if a finding of fact determines that the rezoning would not have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties and with the following stipulations: A. The structure be upgraded to meet all applicable building and fire code requirements. B. Each unit meet the minimum required square footage. Discussion/Decision Mode: First reading is scheduled for 7:00 P.M. on May 14, 1990 in the City Council Chambers. For the second reading and public hearing on June 11, 1990, notice will be published in the Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the property. • JDP:cak Respectfully submitted, Jame Prosser City pager 0 -Y P V 4 N _ O O V O s > > i ?d - XERXES AVE -?- --•+.+..?•• , JL-.- Jr WASNBURN VINCENT I^?? li_J• .-?I. `./ ?__ir--?..-? UPTON THOMAS SHERIDAN RUSSELL I' QUEEN l:'. OLIVE NEWTON .4' ?LI?-!!-J? f?-•1 ?????j??''7 ('???I 1.q1 MORGAN LOGAN KNOX 77 i1C?G1 JAMES ,!'-'-'-'J??r?I IRVING /1 I I?? I -'^'?r^?-- ==L HUMBOLDT GIRARD 1(tl= J- -il FREMONT EMERSON IUL?L?? DUPONT COLFAX BRYANT I! Ip??'?'j•--??LJ?? ` ALDRIC LYNDALE AVE GARFIELD -7j HARRIET GRAND Iljl __. _.- ?I ?•. j'P?I'?t''??? I, j.??._ PLEASANT PILLSBURY '_ II- I `-.DUI WENTIYOl7H BLAISDELL'\ NICOLLET AVE. te, ? STEVENS I i-? q II 2ne I-=- D.e - CLINTON ?•- .?? II ???'i :ll II 411, SIN???--J?1 J??I PORTLAND AVE. L.: €FI 11,11LP Ii -I OAKLAND PARK ,'ill ?--? COLUMBUS CHICAGO I?0 ELL10T Gil6l I??? 10 a 'III i R ;f ID IN 14 In I I;?1 1 IS IN ' 1, li i?^ I BLOOMINGTON I ': ?. Is 1N 17 to. lot& CEDAR AVE. ?? •• -Lcti-?--- --• --' 11 _ LONGFELLOW ______ \ _-K---_--• to ; i i i i ?_ ; p O : 1 N zA2 n O '77 c 2 ... T Z w y y N y `_1 r s w y y N ` L. MN y 0 pp N W N z y NE XERXES AvE. WASNBURN ---'??-? VINCENT ---',? UPTON THOMAS I SHERIDAN RUSSELL a QUEEN PENN AVE. OLIVER NEWTON MORGAN _ LOGAN ?- II KNOX JAMES =??111 IRVING NUMBOLOT -- li GIRARD FREMONT I, EMERSON I \ II DUPONT _? I III I' COLFAX BRYANT ALDRICH LYNDALE AVE. aI GARFIELD --?71?I'I NARR ET 11 II I I GRAND l ilI I I I +?+cr--t= PLEASANT III PILLSBURY I RI I WENTWORTH I II t BLAISDELL '"='y 111111 NICOLLET AVE. \\ let STEVENS ?I and I 3114 CLINTON ?I ?,N 511, PORTLAND AVE OAKLAND PARK l' COLUMBUS II CHICAGO ELLIOT j' II IO IN II 12t 18 13 16 1, IN O? IB tN O BL00M1NGTON .loth I71N _ IB IN CEDAR AVE. LONGFELLOW IB 111, :QIN . I`r •,, at at 11 Egad 77 I ,I ii--?- sTANDISN 2S I.2S r? w w ? 4 N • N M ?- 5,p- r 0 0 Bl• 0 Z a) 101 MOL 1 W m z C m cl) 0 C 2 4-15-3 21ST AVENUE SOUTH _ W W cn A D r m N N 0 m m -a ?Y. ,irk: ?,?,?; • ,"'4's•.'i::?%^-+:';c:i ?,•?`w?:;:;:;??: •• a ?: • •??iy.:` ,' to :?:s:.'lg:z.: «.'•??'.'.•;`-: to :::#... ?• .: Sal ? :??`?.: ?. i?`??:??-",? fay :S.•::?: L/ yr: • ' S3!?• i?^+,' 6513 i 6511 -35 O o° ' °o c 20? 30' c so. ?o r ? -o•J I I s V °r--? cl <L__J I? m 0 Z? (ji e j Ow ou ON rn W v -4 rn rn z ma rrn >(1) z 0 C 6511-13 21ST AVENUE SOUTH PETITION SIGNATURES , PROPERTY OF OWNERS WHO SIGNED-50.4% PROPERTY OF OWNERS WHO DID NOT SIGN 23 \? 22 VN4) 21 20 ??L1 19 Ie 11e) 14 ' N) t3 (,N) n ???? I _ I_5 6 ? 2 1'?) in '02 3 H. 2 2 - 2 11p) 4 21 13c) <?v? s 20 Iys) ??1 6 19 ?j4) ' • ?,,?) ? to ?33) . ,,a e I T (I l ?ti5) 9 16 ?i\ ;,u) to 15 ?y? I t 14 o I : 0 17 3(? ?t 22! 4\ 1 21 19 to 17 ?1 N + `ys Y 16?).1 h X41) is I41 °ii 1040% A ' e ? 'I t l?) 124 ???> 23 ?1°} o 3 e? 22 4 (il) 21 20 6 `?l ?• 7 19 I t3 I + e , ?S) 17 16 ? I ' /I v 11 V p ; o , 12 ) a 65th _ 21 ?h N Is 1yj 1 2a`?5) ° ?3) 2 23?i?? c C'!4? 3 22 ?3) ?j9? 4 2 i (?ti) ' Cam).' . 6 ' 19 e) : (,qy a 17 4i? 9 +? ?11) I6 X41 Io rs ( ? . 4? 11 . i g)14 (( ?? ?? W 12 k: 23 2. ? 21 r? 0 w, q 0 11 12 13 14 _ 40 c N N N FA 60 I 11? ,°n 3 4 0?. , 6 8 9 + roTk II ? 12 ° 2(41)0 114)23 3 ?? 111•) 22 1?= 4 s ,. r 20 .(1po) 6 19 , 16 ??4) Io '---+s --? r?)11 14 p1? , 12? a'1?)13 0 = 1. STREET 23 ° 2 1 *-'2,2,- 3 3?) 21 `yb) + 4 ( 20k) s LM r- U1?? . s ?? Is 7 (110 r? rl.s• •.q? 11 12 13 14 v N r c? A b0. (i0 ? ? ? Gr0 O 0 r' 31 !147 11 12 13 10 7c?2 f3 11 - 13 ,.AS PIS. ..... Mill Qe s. .... 0 24 6511-13 21ST AVENUE SOUTH ZONING ED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL MR MULTIPLE DWELLING ED • El I INDUSTRIAL MR-1 2 FAMILY RESIDENCES Q R RESIDENCE E3 MR-2 3-16 UNIT RESIDENCES I I I I i ;1 ( I ( I I I T c x X x Y Y / rA W a c a c W L 1 1 ? 1 I 1 1 1 fA 3 0 J J W U. 0 Z O J I I I 1 1 I i 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 E. 66TK ST. 6511-13 21ST AVENUE SOUTH LAND USE COMMERCIAL - 15 APARTMENTS E2 PARKS VACANT DUPLEX QUASI-PUBLIC SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 1 I I ( I I I I I I E. 641 ' I I i I " ? I I i I I I I I I I I T. N N {jj W ? Q 3 e 0 a C W W W U C7 Z O J 11s ? J 1= E. 66TH ST. 6511-13 21ST AVENUE SOUTH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOTEL/MOTEL, DINING /ENTERTAINMENT, RETAIL, WHOLESALE, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, OFFICES ai a a 0 W V rl%ft rl%ft Im MAW F-9 E. 66TK ST. • September 27, 1989 Mr. Vince T. Seiter M.J. Hentges 2057 Carrol Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE Subject: 6511-13 21st Avenue South - Richfield, Minnesota Dear Mr. Seiter: An investigation by our Fire Division has revealed that the duplex at 6511-13 21st Avenue South has been modified by adding dwelling units in the basement of each unit. No building permits have been obtained for the remodeling nor any land use zoning change granted. The two lower units are being occupied in violation of the City of Richfield Code and must be vacated within 30 days of receipt of this Notice of Non-Compliance. If you have any questions regarding this notice, I may be reached at 866-5016, Ext. 370. Sincerely, Sivert Hendrickson Building Official SH:lkt 0 _?_ 6-9 March 5, 1990 Dear Mr. Hendrickson, This letter is in regards to your letter notifying me of the zoning problem at my property at 6511-6513 21st Ave. So. in Richfield. I have begun the application process for rezoning of the property from MR-1 to MR-2. As you stated in our conversation this process is the equivilent of an appeal. -It is my intention to rezone the property as quickly as possible in an attempt to resolve this matter. Sincerely, ?Jinranr T. Seiter C? 0 DATE: loon COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PIANNING AND ZONING DIVISION City of Richfield, Minnesota 6700 Portland Avenue South . 869-7521 A?: LiC'T:CN IS HEREBY MADE FOR: MC ZONING C ANG7 V?..?I iNCE C_' +NDITIONAL USE PERMIT OTHER sv: Viacent T. Seiter Owne=/Apps --an- P.O. Box 22433 Address Robi:.sda?e/55422 City/Zip 884-6878 business Phone Fcr the _ rc^er-t77 Located at: Address: 6511-6513 21St Ave So. Su?di•J:.ier.: New Ford Town Blcck LC Existi-_ Use Cr Land: .4 unit residential rental Existin c Zcninc: 'MR-1 Ex=stint Buildings: "Ur. Yes No P_cgcsed building/additions: Yes -_i7_ No Prcpcse_ Changes in Use: None P_cpcse_ Chances in Zoning: _ M$-1 to P1R-2 to oermit for the our existing units, as it has been for over 25 years Conditional Use Permit Request: Variance Requested: - Please attach all necessary drawings, iaaps,'and site plans required. Applicants Signature: Dz?a: March 4, 1990 Fee: Received by: Receipt u Data: r REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM 1U1?- TO ]Y) R -Z FOR PURPOSE OF 01 vL14S I Street Address: _1Q 5 (? ' l aZ S+ ? ?a Legal Description: o -?s 3-4- 4 goo c- s M e-L,? Fc- -J T coWe, the undersigned, being owners of land within 300 feet of the land described above, do hereby concur in this rezoning request. Signature of Owners* Address x 143Z r212 w \wv -? { o . /ri ; (41 5Ito 2? s r 7&VV. S . 6SW ZI S+- A,I S ?o 1 -4- n 5 yen Kt sa s 3? ?;?"" Av Sc, is ? I ter? ?J 7? ? I 1 *For purposes of determining if petition contains the proper number of signatures to intitate the rezoning process, signatures may not be removed once a petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. r / REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM - TO I FOR PURPOSE OF lb 1_0-e r Lk v\ t T5 Street Address: ?o S 1 I - /„ S l 1 54 4 ? sc Legal Description: -- ?.? 1,?s 3-404 Sloc-k- iST fUe-i,,) F o-.-c( We, the undersigned, being owners of land within 300 feet of the land described above, do hereby concur in this rezoning request. Signature of Owners* ,- t Address ' n /Jf . 6$ s'? 7e?k 6 50 GSl r ?.-O ?v r ? a At- *For purposes of determining if petition contains the proper number of signatures to intitate the rezoning process, signatures may not be removed once a petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM - TO FOR PURPOSE OF 7'?' 1'N?r eX? S7`i yl 4 ?L ?2 ?S I Street Address: ?p 5 j - l 3 -,7/ Legal Description: We, the undersigned, being owners of land w4thin 300 feet of the land described above, do.hereby concur in this rezoning request. Signature of Owners*, y r 0 Address I II I *For purposes of determining if petition contains the proper number of signatures to intitate the rezoning process, signatures may not be removed once a petition is signed and returned to the Planning Division. • REQUEST FOR REZONING FROM m !? - J TO FYI -L???? FOR PURPOSE OF '? a e-)t fs ?i',iq ?eijer "n i Street Address: Legal Description: We, the undersigned, being owners of land within 300 feet of the land described above, do hereby concur in this rezoning request. Signature of Owners* C7 *For purposes of determining i number of signatures to intit signatures may not be removed returned to the Planning Divi Address E petition contains the proper ate the rezoning process, once a petition is signed and lion. X15-IS Memorandum City of Richfield, Minnesota DATE: April 23, 1990 TO: Mark Noble FROM: Sivert Hendrickson SUBJECT: 6511-13 21st Avenue South - Inspection with owner 4/7/90 The following items of concern relating to building codes are noted: 1. Wall and ceiling covering does not permit an inspection of venting of plumbing system for bathroom and kitchen sink. Verification of compliance with the Plumbing Code is needed. 2. Operable smoke detectors are required. 3. Height of furred ceiling in a portion of the habitable area is 6'7}" and should be 7'0". 4. Combustion air must be provided for furnaces. There is no permit on file for boiler that heats two lower units. 5. Electrical panel for north unit had fuses that were not in compliance with the electrical code. Panel on south unit was not checked. 6. Handrail and guard rail are required for front steps. 7. If permit is granted for use of four units, each must have its own electrical meter and City must collect a $600.00 per unit Sewer Availability Charge for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. 0 Stephen Mitchell Leslie Hale 6511 21st Ave So Richfield, MN 55423 City of Richfield: March 5, 1990 We are writing regarding the status of the residence we are currently renting at the above address. We understand that as it now stands the building is in violation of the zoning ordinances. We also understand that this condition has been present for the past twenty five years. We have lived here since last June. We have not had any problem with the downstairs neighbors in that time nor have we had any problems with the landlord. We're happy with how things stand right now and we have no problem with them continuing under the present arrangement. We hope this matter is resolved in favor of our landlord and that renters be allowed to continue to occupy the basement units. E Yours truly, Stephe,r /Mitchell ' Lesllie Hale 0 12-0 3t-uy? BrooJ er -01 x , Robbi n ?? x.. ?l?-L?Q l,` ?t. ?? Cam' ?L. c (Cc a J \1 =P 1 e? _171 _ ? ? 1 n ^ \ 1 .' Ut?1 ysc -?, c r, , j 1 ?-? 1 1 PLC ?J LLr?, the _ -? O`S? C?l1r? Vk fanov? M J J ?J West East sh i t ` • C, E • • •? ? r 1\1?, fW vl vk L.. ! 1 U I 1 S tJ. - { I ?. e X15-Iti • 17 5 T 3• v? S' i, tv I ? I ? 1 U d, 3 0 1 1 6 50 1 1 J ?:5- 13 L T-F ?e E • • 6 1-42, e/67-9' U ?1 t f J 1 A l 9 J Y? Y? 0 1 04 k,.,? I GSrI _Gsr3 ( r ?. la?tl > ?-- IrlarrS ?l ?? F J F •1 I eP_. p_I ?? ? I ?1C s I0 • • ?&- I/e l r A-,(:) r, i , 11 ' ,\ -4 F 44 I r,ol. t i E! ci ?I t ? I I I II E1 ' t I ?;c l-V) L h reC E I F I 'i ?: nclow I I` L ?s I I T 13• J? .I [. it 3 ,A- 0 v E So PETITIONER'S SKETCH I / ? 15 a, `-f PETITIONER'S SKETCH • Mo pl1! M MOpl.l I M t i C r: sf X j,/ 6-o G S(! Z,, :5'13 w PETITIONER'S SKETCH MpV.wl AePM A ?NHV M r?? • 02 5? AV 'SC) 4:5- /3 r .a ?iaq'ravr.sa,-d,J X15-2? PETITIONER'S SKETCH sao s?.? Lcc ,z d = 131 ,50C, s?. ?4% main /oor- =oZ 3, 00 b F4 7-,4-o.- ? I• W i i i L i ao' - Ave, ?50 /D D /(o • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 135 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Resolution and first reading of an ordinance amendment to change name of the Grantee under the Franchise from Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. Background: Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. is the current Grantee under the cable communications ordinances (or "Franchises") of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Richfield. Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. (Rogers) desires to change its corporate name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. Rogers is requesting approval of the name change from the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission and its Member Cities. Rogers does not intend to make any changes to its corporate structure or to the control of its operations, but it simply desires to change its name. Since this is only a name change and not a change in corporate structure, Member Cities may indicate approval by Resolution. KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. and its parent companies have already acknowledged that KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. is the corporate successor of Rogers, and the parent companies have also reaffirmed their status as guarantors of KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc.'s rights and obligations under the Franchise (see Acknowledgment and Consent attachment). On March 22, 1990, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) prepared and passed a resolution adopting the name change (see Resolution attachment). Counsel for the SWSCC has also prepared a model resolution and model ordinance for use by the Member Cities to approve the name change, should they decide to do so. Richfield's Resolution and Ordinance Amendment are attached. Recommended Motion: Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution and Ordinance Amendment approving the name change of Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. Basis of Recommendation: 1. This is only a change of name, not of corporate structure. 2. KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. and its parent companies issued an Acknowledgment and Consent that KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. is the corporate successor of Rogers, and that the parent companies reaffirm -4 l 4?, -1 their status as guarantors of KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc.'s rights and obligations under the Franchise. 10 3. SWSCC adopted a Resolution approving the name change. 4. It is anticipated that the other four Member Cities will also pass resolutions and ordinance amendments approving the name change. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The Council may choose not to approve the name change. However, SWSCC has already reviewed the request and found no reason to disapprove the request. Discussion/Decision Mode: The City Council may approve the attached Resolution and Ordinance Amendment at the May 14, 1990 City Council meeting. A public hearing and the second reading will be at the June 11, 1990 City Council meeting. Respectf ly submitted, Jame Prosser City anager 0 JDP:ff t t? 1V-62? RESOLUTION NO. '76 d S • RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL TO A CHANGE OF NAME OF GRANTEE FROM ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. TO KBL CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. D/B/A PARAGON CABLE WHEREAS, Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. ("RCTSI") is the current grantee under the cable communications ordinance ("Franchise") of the City of Richfield, Minnesota ("City"); and WHEREAS, RCTSI desires to change its corporate name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., d/b/a Paragon Cable ("KBLCSI") and has requested the City's approval of the name change; and WHEREAS, RCTSI does not intend to make any changes to its ownership structure or to the control of its operations, but desires only to change its name; and WHEREAS, KBL Cable, Inc. ("KBLC") and KBLCOM Incorporated ("KBLCOM") are the guarantors of RCTSI's obligations under the Franchise pursuant to a Consent Agreement and Guaranty of Performance given to the City; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SWSCC") reviewed the request for approval of RCTSI's name change and found no reason to disapprove of the request, provided KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI first acknowledge and agree in a writing acceptable to SWSCC's member cities that KBLCSI is the corporate successor of RCTSI for all purposes under the Franchise and that KBLC and KBLCOM reaffirm their status as guarantors of KBLCSI's as guarantors of KBLCSO's obligations under the Franchise; and WHEREAS, the City joins in the foregoing findings of SWSCC. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City hereby consents to and approves the change of the name of the grantee under the Franchise from Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., d/b/a Paragon Cable, provided KBLCOM Incorporated, KBL Cable, Inc., and KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. first file with the City an Acceptance and Consent in a form and substance acceptable to the City. 2. The City declares that as of the time of this Resolution, the Franchise and all agreements entered into by RCTSI in connection therewith shall remain in full force and effect, except that KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. shall be deemed to have been substituted as grantee and shall be obligated as RCTSI's successor in interest to perform all of RCTSI's duties and obligations thereunder. t/(' -3 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 14th day of May, 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk is 0 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX NO. E2 OF THE RICHFIELD CITY CODE TO CHANGE THE NAME OF GRANTEE THE CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA, DOES ORDAIN; SECTION 1. That Article I, Section 2, Paragraph J of said Ordinance be amended to read as follows: J. "Grantee" is Rogers-Eablesystems-a€-tie Seuthwest;-IRe:;-a-MiRReseta-eeEperatleA KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest Inc., a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Paragon Cable. • SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect 30 days after adoption and publication, provided that it shall become effective only if all of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield adopt an ordinance similar to this Ordinance within sixty (60) days after the adoption of this Ordinance. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1990. Steven J. Quam Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 r I? • ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND CONSENT Parties: KBL Cable, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("KBLC"). KBLCOM, Incorporated, a Texas corporation ("KBLCOM"). KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., a Minnesota corporation d/b/a Paragon Cable ("KBLCSI"). Effective Date: March 20, 1990. Recitals: 1. Rogers Cablesystems of the. Southwest, Inc. ("RCTSI"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of KBLC (which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of KBLCOM), is the current grantee under the cable communications ordinances (the "Franchises") of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Richfield, Minnesota (collectively, the "Cities"). 2. KBLC and KBLCOM are the corporate guarantors of RCTSI's obligations under the Franchises pursuant to a Consent Agreement and Guaranty of Performance between KBLC, KBLCOM, and each City ("Guaranty"). 3. RCTSI desires to change its name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. and has requested the approval of each City to do so. 4. The Cities are willing to consent to the name change, provided KBLC, KBLCOM and KBLCSI acknowledge in writing that KBLCSI is the successor of RCTSI for all purposes related to the Franchises and that the Guaranty shall remain in full force and effect. • 0 Acknowledgement and Agreements: 1. KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI hereby acknowledge and agree that KBLCSI is the successor in interest to RCTSI for all purposes under the Franchises and the Guaranty (including the Guaranteed Documents as defined in the Guaranty). 2. KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI represent and warrant to the Cities that RCTSI intends only to change its corporate name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., and that no changes in the ownership or control of RCTSI will occur as a result of this name change. 3. KBLC and KBLCOM acknowledge and agree that they remain fully bound under the Guaranty as guarantors of KBLCSI's obligations under the Franchises and the Guaranteed Documents (as defined in the Guaranty). KBLC and KBLCOM hereby waive any defenses to the enforcement of the Guaranty based on RCTSI's change of its name to KBLCSI. KBL CABLE, INC. By Its Vice President cretar & Treasurer KBLCOM INCORPORATED By lY G? / Its ice resi ent, ec tary Treasurer KBL CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. BY Z Its Vice President cretar & Treasurer -2- RESOLUTION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF NAME CHANGE FROM ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. TO KBL CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. WHEREAS, Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. ("RCTSI") is the current grantee under the cable communication franchises granted pursuant to the cable communication ordinances (collectively, the "Franchises") of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and Richfield, Minnesota ("Member Cities"); and WHEREAS,' RCTSI desires to change its name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., d/b/a Paragon Cable ("KBLCSI") and has requested the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SWSCC") and its Member Cities to the approve the name change; and WHEREAS, RCTSI does not intend to make any changes to its ownership struc- ture or to the control of its operations, but desires only to change its name; and WHEREAS, KBL Cable, Inc. ("KBLC") and KBLCOM Incorporated ("KBLCOM") are the guarantors of RCTSI's obligations under the Franchises pursuant to a Consent Agreement and Guaranty of Performance given to each Member City; and WHEREAS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SWSCC") has reviewed the request for approval of RCTSI's name change and has found no reason to disap- prove of the request, provided that KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI acknowledge and agree in a writing acceptable to the Member Cities that KBLCSI is the corporate successor of RCTSI for all purposes under the Franchises and all agreements 0 related thereto, and further provided that KBLC and KBLCOM reaffirm their status as guarantors of KBLCSI's obligations under the Franchises. NOW, THEREFORE, at a regularly scheduled meeting of SWSCC, SWSCC resolves as follows: SWSCC hereby approves and recommends to the Member Cities that each of them consent to and approve RCTSI's request for a name change to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., d/b/a Paragon Cable, provided KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI first execute and deliver to each Member City an Acknowledgement and Consent in a form satisfactory to the Member Cities. Dated this -//*?' day of 1990. • SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION By It Chaibpe son -2- -01'7 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 136 Agenda May 14, 1990 Issue Statement: Council consideration as to whether to hold a Council meeting on may 28, 1990. Background: Because of.the Memorial Day holiday, the second Council meeting for May, 1990, would be held on Tuesday, May 29. Recommended Motion: Cancel the City Council meeting regularly scheduled for May 28. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The business can be carried over to June, 1990. 2. The holiday may cause a problem with a quorum for the Council. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Hold the second Council meeting in May on May 29. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been placed on the May 14, 1990 Council agenda so that proper public notification can be made if the meeting is cancelled. Respectfully submitted, (W:6- Ja D. Prosser Ci Manager JDP:cak 0