The URL can be used to link to this page

11-23-87 agenda1411 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 361 Agenda November 23, 1987 Iss"Up Statement: Consid\eration of appointments to the South Hennepin Human Services Council. Background: Richfield, along with the cities of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, and Edina, are members of the South Hennepin Human Services Council. Each city-is" represented by four directors. Due to the resignations of Lia Ozols and Lone Lunas, Richfield has two director vacancies. I- Mayor Hamilton has indicated that he wishes to appoint Council Member Martin Kirsch and Myrna Hammer to fill these vacancies. The appointments will be for two years, with an expiration date of January 31, 1990. Richfield is also represented on this board by Council Member Ivan Ludeman and Sgt. John Nelson. Recommended Motion: Appoint Myrna Hammer and Council Member Kirsch to the South Hennepin Human Services Council Board of Directors for terms which will expire January 31, 1990. Basis for Recommendation: 1. Vacancies on this board currently exist and it is important that Richfield continue to be represented on this board. 2. Myrna Hammer and Council Member Kirsch have expressed an interest in serving on this board. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Appoint another person to this board. 2. Continue the appointments. Discussion/Decision Mode: These appointments have been placed on the November 23, 1987 city council agenda for council action. Respe ully submitted, James Prosser City nager JDP/eja ??7 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 360 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Repurchase of 7300 First Avenue Background: In July, 1984 the City of Richfield authorized the sale of 7300 First Avenue to David and Laurie Morgan in the amount of $68,288. The property was sold to the Morgans with the clear representation that the property had flooded and was in an area prone to flooding. The city had made certain floodproofing improvements to the structure, but did not represent that the structure would not flood again at a future date. The property had originally been purchased from the prior home owner in October, 1982 at the request of the homeowner because of flooding problems experienced at this location. On September 25, 1987 the City of Richfield received a letter from attorneys representing Mr. Morgan requesting the city repurchase the property and pay Mr. Morgan for damages resulting from the flood of July 23, 1987, which allegedly exceeded $40,000. Mr. Morgan appeared at the council meeting of October 26, 1987 and again requested that the city repurchase the property. City staff has met with Mr. Morgan and his attorneys on several occasions. As a result of those meetings, the attorneys representing Mr. Morgan have prepared a purchase agreement for the property at the original purchase price. The agreement also holds harmless the city from any future claims for damages resulting from the initial sale of the property to the Morgans. Recommended Motion: Approve the repurchase of 7300 First Avenue in the amount of $68,288 and authorize the City Manager to execute all documents relating to the sale of the property. Basis for Recommendation: The basis of the recommendation will be more fully described to the council during an executive session with the city attorney prior to the meeting of November 23. Alternative Recommendation: Deny request of Morgans to repurchase the property. 0 z/7 Discussion/Decision Mode: An executive session to review this matter will be held at 6:45 P.M. on November 23. If the recommendation of staff and council is accepted at that time, the council would authorize action on this item during the regular council meeting of that evening. Respectfully submitted, James Prosser City nager JDP/eja 0 * 0 n LeFevem Lefler Kennedy O'Brien & Drawz . profekiml Association 2000 First Bank Pkica want November 19, 1967 MlrvwwpoNa Mirvtseots 40402 Telephone (012) 2,330643 Telaoopier (0121 333.0040 Clayton L. Way" Hobe P. Lefler J. Dennis O'srien John E. Drawn Devil J. Kennedy Joseph E. Hamilton John S. Doan Glenn E. Purdue Richard J. Schleffer Charles L LeFevere Horbart P. Lefler III James J. Thomson, Jr. ThC R. Galt Johh" . Km"sl Steven B. Schmidt James M. strommen Ronald H. Batty William P. Jordan Wlgism R. skallawd Rodnsy D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine David D. Seaudoh+ Paul L fiaemuesen Steven M. Tellen Merv Frances Skele Christopher J. Harris"i Timothy J. Pawkinty Rol! A. Bponhaim Juts A. Bergh John C. Kuehn, Esq. Pepin, Dayton, Berman Graham, P.A. 930 Lumber Exchange Ten'South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN $5402 Re: 7300 - let Avenue South, Richfield Dear Mr. Kuehn: Enclosed for your review please find a Purchase Agreement on the above-referenced property. The Agreement has been modified to contain the points which we discussed on the telephone Tuesday. You will note, that the Releaser Relocation waiver and Lease are attached as exhibits. Please let me know at your earliest convenience whether the form of those documents is acceptable. As I indicated to you on Tuesday, the City Manager is willing to take this matter to the City Council on November 23, provided that the Purchase Agreement is executed by your clients prior to the meeting. To accomplish that, we suggest that you deliver to this office the executed Purchase Agreement (and initialed exhibit paged) by early afternoon on November 23. We will then deliver it to the manager. If the council approves the purchase, the earnest money and the Agreement executed by the City will be delivered to you as soon as possible. I will also call you on November 24 with the council decision. Assuming that the purchase is approved, the City will use its best efforts to close on. November 30. However, we John C, Rueh,., Esq. November 19, 1967 Page 2 . must have the mortgagee's pay-off letter and a reasonable time to review the extended abstract prior to the closing. Respectfully yours, )t. . J H. Dean JBD:rar Enclosures L.?I 0 MryyteinmlH tnAy STANDARD/7 . ?? ? PURCHASE AGREEMENT pun+w•'e8»wrt i =ifthriaid ,MlnrtesAS Nermh.r 183E 2 RECEWOOF Ciri o! liehfialA 3 thewmd One Thmeand Tires Hundred and tee/1003 DON= Is1-3AA_AA ? 4 by .,1 '.each.^„ < '. _.^ As eanwr money to be deposited the rsra hWnM day erar B=Mno. In &W amount of Ibdrq broker ('-,..-"QOWVA" p.Aed In wrbing) and In Derr paynhers for the purchase a the prennI legally described as 6 Baa lghihit ? sttaehed h.r.te 7. e, boated at (S&W Addraa) 7300 First Aranue South 1iehlield Coumt+ of ?zyPin SasdMlnnesaie, 10 M Cpr?yytoolg all plant. Shrub and trees, all StOrm windowsand/a Inserts, swm doors, Streena, Awnings, window shides, blinds, curtain. 11. traterAS4ap?ryrorie.etleolsdlgMl fhdureswhhbults,plumbing httures,wowhow, hounpayStam 17 •1so"Ale air 11her, water salmis, cable slwNbn outMS and gblinp. BUILT-INS to includi 13 dishwasher, garbage db pceal. Itaod•hn intercom, Its ' led carWIn& IF ANY, 14. beard on ds pr«nbee which are the property of SOW and am the followingpersonal preperly: ftg*- 18. 18. 17 NI a which property Sailor has "day Sad to Buys for the sum d: S 6a. 288.00 18. Sixty-light Thousand Two Hundred 8lthty-Eight and NO/1000 payer ,9. 26 which Bawer Agnes to cev In the following ~nor: Borneo money of e 1-300 - 00 And 21. a 66.758.00 own over before November 30. 1987 tfs des a alesirq tettbdba? 7? 23. 24. Bee Exhibit S. Additional Conditions Partain?ha to Bala) 26 26. 27. 28. 28 30 31. AttasMdaev 3 addondunswhichanmadaSp•ndthbagr"wI rrhi hors daecsibed as Lzhibit? 8 C 32 SUBJECT TO performance by Buyer, Seller prose m ersarte and deliver a Q; ^i_ •- NEtltll?pt tQJ 33 to be Joined in by pouts, N any. oonvoylnp merkesble this to the premlossAub?e? only to the ng e?maptlors: 34 n Bwlaingandmnkglawe,ordinances, &ateendFederelraguletbns.t2? Ramiawnsrebd tot.sarlmprarem.ntau»pr mweewnncw 36 ai forfehurepTv? (3) Reservation of any minarets or minaret hs to theStaro(Minnesos. An NI UtU+ty d dreinege oos; e 36 which do not interfere, vrM nprMent ImprovenMnt?. ?clSl?t/ggpst>yt 37 . 3^ PLIES 0 4r 41 MKMMMM Bailor werrwkm shat a ne dw and payebb indoe year t i itZ _ will be homestead 42 closelficatien. Neither Sailer nor SNNr's Agent makes any representation cones, Ing the amotax d hthrte reel..rose tales. 43 WARRANTIES Seller warrants that bulkli 44 11 IN W . nP, ?_Arv, Are entirely within the bowidery lines of the prernis". Mob 46 r has right to ilaing. guyar- 11 1104 #!vt all Miances, heating AM Air 45 47. 48 48 60 51. 52 53 ? - - - M W-ON Sellor shall, within a reasonable time st1w nee of this syssaw. furnish an'Abvjw of This. or a 64. Registered Pr cortilledtodelstaincludo ------ searches covering bnnkr? State and Federal judgetento And 11M 55. "it be aI=1T=1=dvp afw fenipt for vxa;wirmM of title And making any objectlow which shall be mods in writing or d= 66 wohled. If any Objection Is so made, Seller shall be allowed 120de" to mom tMe marketable. Ponan 67 'r" of title, payments hereunder required shell bo FW %rbut.rm correction of We and within 10dep afW written notice Buyer, the parties Omit perform this 68 ngt Agreement accord 0 me title is not corrected within 120 do" from the data of writion objection, this agrearnont shall bs mull And 6? void, at opft of Buyer. nelther party shall be liable for do g hersunder to the other, and earnest mm mv owl be refunded to Buyer. 6', DEFAULT fftM, Is m-rkstabis or lacortected within sold It mA and Buyer defoulte In any ofthe agreements horelr% Seller maytorminato this 6, 87 6? 64. suchrilgh"tf". arloss. In the event Buyer default$ In his performance Oi V;;teWs_vHhi Agrufflent, and Notice of Cancellation Is 85 served upon the Buyer pursuant to M&A 5159.21, the termination period shall be thirty (30) days 28 permitted by Subdivision 4 of MSA 66 V 6E Bar 69 AMOY OWLOSURR tellers W-6-1 LbAt Zhu AV. no ted 16v.. a ?ra&l astate *sent or 70 In Ohio transaction. It - 73 SSUM ar nos pm Wim 74. W"M &.or% Morgan sum 75 Delivery of all peers And I a own be made at the office of: 76 CAmWoy Partin Dorton Heraun 6 Ora .+.. DA Selling Agent tr..... 77 Address 930 Lumber Exchange. Tan S. Filth St, gtyl4ineeaeeltit. 30 ap UA1 7 e THIS 10 A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. IF NOT UNDERSTOOD.. ELK COMP9UNT ADVICE. 71 1 the owner of the premises, Accept this agreement and • Cit]r off u hlisidd t6p Premfw for the prlaa and an the sma and 72. rite sale hereby made. aonidkb estfort rs act fordo abellove. Zxhibit A - Attachment to Purchase Agreement, 7300 - lot Avenue s South North 105 feet of 3ast 150.48 feet of Nest 1/4 of North 10 acres of South 20 acres of Southwest 1/4 of northeast 1/4 of Section 34, Township 28, Range 24, except road subject to restrictions, easements or covenants of record and subject to the following additional covenant: grantee accepts the premises described herein with the knowledge that storm water may flood the property from time to time, and further may on occasion flood the entire basement and first floor of the dwelling located upon the conveyed property. Grantee, Its successors and assigns, releases and holds harmless grantors, their heirs, successors and assigns from liability for any damages which may result from the collection and flooding of storm water on the conveyed property. This covenant is hereby expressly wade an essential is part of this Instrument, and shall be and remain an obligation with respect to the property and shall run with the land and shall be binding on the parties herein designated, their successors, heirs and assigns. of EXHIBIT A .. North 105 feat of seat 150,48 feet Of ...West 1/4 of North 10 acres of South 20 Gores Of Southwest 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 of section 34, Township 28, Range 24, except road subject to restrictions, easements or covenants of record and subject to the following additional .covenants grantee, accepts the herein with the knowled premises described qe that stone water may flood the property from time to time, and further may o occasion flood the entire basement and first floor a the dwelling located upon the c of Grantee, its successors and assi onve ye0 ases perty. holds harmlessliabrantors, their gust rele heirs, sueoess e and assigns from ility for any damages and Whic result from the collection and flooding of sh may on the conveYed property. water • This covenant is hereby expressly made an essential' Part of this instrument, and shall be and remain an obligation with respect to the with the land and shall be bindin rt on the ha11 run herein designated, their successors, heirs and assigns, g . a • Exhibit • ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS PERTAINING TO SALE C? L Cash purchase price shall first be applied to pay and satisfy the lien of any mortgage on the property. Buyer will assume all special assessments, if any. Seder will pay delinquent real estate taxes, if any. Property taxes due and payable in 1987 shall be prorated to day of closing. Buyer will pay taxes due and payable in 1988. Buyer acknowledges that it has inspected the property and does agree to buy the same `as is" in its present condition without any obligation on the part of Seller to make improvements. Buyer agrees to lease the premises to Seiler on a monthly basis for a period up to six months following closing at a rate of $385.43 per month. On the date of closing, and as a precondition to closing, Seiler will execute and deliver to Buyer the General Release attached hereto as Exhibit C and the Waiver of Relocation benefits attached hereto as Exhibit D. Both such exhibits are incorporated herein as if fully set forth at this point. On the date of closing, the parties shall enter into and execute the Lease attached hereto as Exhibit E and made a part hereof as if fully incorporated at this point. 0 EXHIBIT C MiLXA22 OF CLUM Lori Morgan and David Morgan (the Morgans) hereby release and forever discharge the City of Richfield, its officers, agents, and employees, from liability for any and all claims, causes of action, damages, or injuries to the Morgans or to their real or personal property, whether presently known or unknown to th Morgans, which claims, `causes of action, damages or injuries a• a out of or result from the Morgans' purchase in 1984 of the pi arty at 7300 - lot Avenue South in the City (as described in the attached Exhibit A) or which claims, causes of action, damages, or injuries arise out of or result from the collection • or discharge of any water at any time upon the P Y roPartY property, . The Morgans acknowledge that they have received the advice of their own attorney in this matter, that they have been fully • advised of their rights and of the consequences of signing this release, and that they knowingly and voluntarily sign this release in consideration for the City's agreement to repurchase the property at 7300 - lot Avenue South from the Morgans. Lori Morgan David Morgan C/0055RWO1.G48 EXHIBIT D • WAIVER Of RELOCATION PAYMEE'1'8 RELOCATION RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS UNDER THE UNIFORM ACT The Uniform Ac Under the-' Un orm Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Uniform Act) eligible property owners who are displaced by a public project receive: 1. Pa men( o Moving Ex a ses This may e either a xed payment, including disloca- tion allowance, up to $500, or a payment for actual moving costs. 2. Re lacement Housing Payment This may be a payment up to $15,000 to purchase a home or a payment up to $4,000 to rent a dwelling. 3. Fixed Payment in Lieu of Movina and Related Exvenses The owner of a rental property may be e g a or his payment which ranges from $2,500 to $10,000. If the rental property to be acquired qualifies for this payment, the amount of benefits is determined by the income produced during the two previous tax years. 4. - Other Relocati A s sta ce T s nc u es housing referrals and other assistance to help the owner relocate to a comparable, decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling. Under the regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the owner cannot be required to move from his home unless he is given reasonable opportunities to relocate to a comparable, decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling that he can afford. it am the owner of the property at I have voluntarily submitted an offer to se t a property to the City of Richfield. On a representative of the City of Rich a scusse with me-719 relocation payments and other assistance provided under the Uniform Act. it was explained to me that I cannot be required to sell this property to the City of Richfield unless I am given these relocation payments and other assistance. It was further explained that the City of Richfield will not acquire the property from me unless I voluntarily enter into the agreement of sale and also agree to waive my rights ?j 7 /co 17J under the Uniform Act. This agreement was not made under any threat by the City of Richfield to acquire the property from me by eminent domain. I understand the basic requirement of the Uniform Act. I know that I cannot be required to sell the property to the City of Richfield unless given the relocation assistance required by the Uniform Act. However, I VOLUNTARILY WAIVE MY RIGHTS TO AjY DE RELOCATION PAYMENTS AND OTHW ATI N ASSISTANCE Ufl This waiver shall expire on , unless by that date the City of Richfield has enter into a written agreement to buy the property from me. Lot Morgan Dated: • David organ Dated: Witness Dated: • C/0055RW01.048 MD. I EXHIBIT E si4wta.uvu aa., S UbttttUM Made s ..................... ................................................... day of.....h&ceesb,ar...... ......, Y ?...., by an4 E:aee?..._.1G?,!...s?...Ji. ........ »..».... __........»..».» ............. .............. ................................. .,.... , ......................................»...,....»..........»..».»......._..».,........»:.....».»...»......:.._...»...».......»..,»...»...........: party of the $ret part, Lemw.., ....._ ............. w . ................... ...................................................>..,, .,.............................. , ................................. ......_partly of t11s seeooad per, Lewee.R.., Nittteosetb. That the said party of the )trst part, in 00nAdffl%d1on of the r8ntt and 0OWMan,0s, Ureln of w mantioned, do...... hereby Demtas, Lsass and Lot unU the said part of the woonld part, and 0710 said party of the wooed part do ...... hereby hire and take from the said party of the $rot part, Ohs falkRv- fng desertbsd premim, situated in th0 County of., ,...,...??t?.T???t.ta .........................:.. ..»..,............ ...., a" mass of ,, ..... Fi #C . ........ . ........... ..............,......................... , Vii: Forth 105 feet of East 150.48 feet of Wemt 1/4 of North 10 acres of South 20 acres of Southw¢At 1/4 of Northaast 1/4 of SAttioy* 34, Township 28, Range 24, nxcPpt road. And hAving the rtrept addr.,•saa of 7300 - lest Ave., So., Richfield,, Minrippotn. It* Volt asnb to Wootb, The above rental prsm4w unto the said Lssasa.s.., . ?ca€?? c 7Gat 7 t L Wolin, for and durinj 94 full terms of- ......... ......................................... ................ from and after the .............. .......... 1-.1.............................. ..,day of....................... .Afmfmhem........1 10'.61...., to,..And,...with...J=e................ I ..».,......... ... ?Y....tiny...L s?,gad...VF.4'j....t.hj daXt!...??'?,?!?en............ .............................................. . . ...................................................,.,........,.. .,.................................... ....................,... .1nd th0 said Lessee..s. acres...... to and wUh tho saint Lamar,.,... to pay as rant for the a&-we Manttoned pr*n- Lwa tho sum of...,, F 00.... o.m.1,4N....... 1..,.4 ....................I.....,.,...._.DI LLdR?9' per month payable in advance with the first payment due upon execution of this Leamn and monthly parymentn due beginning can the-,first tats of January, 1988, and can the first day of, each month thereafter dwrtng th¢ ta" of. thies Loaea. Lesaseen Ahall also pay before penalty atts.ehAg all wrttAr, ge?wpr, Alectric, gas, tell-phone and other utility bills. Lessees shall keep and TiAintain the p?remines in A estruo of good repair, and PhAll surrender them in the r..o*idition in which they wore demised, ordinavy weer and tear excepted. (sAe back for additional conditions) ..... ............................... ........................ ,,..,.....1...........-.....torr 0" durlns the f uu taring Of this Lease. .4nd it is further agreed by and befwssn the parties. as foltows. That should the, avid Lsaaes.,S, fall to make the above montioned paymanfs as herein speoifted, or to pay the ra 'aims id when due, or fall $o fulftlZ any of the oovenanate herein contained, than anti in that oase t s l be lawful for the. said Lessor...... to re-tnter and take possession of the abovs rented peromises, and `hold and enjoy the same without suoh re-enterfnj working a forfeiture of fht rents to be paid and tbs movenants to be performed by the said Lewes.. for the full Stan o t th.fa rAmn. 4n1d the said Lessees%., alto oovenant ...... . and agree...... to and with the said ,Lessor...... not to ass£gta this Lease, or underZet the above rented premises or any part thereof, without i4rd obtatntnj 1h4 um1A en oon Bent of the said Lessor......, and that ...... ............ will, at OW explrutton of the arw as hsrafn rwd, quietly 1414 and surrender the aforesaid pret lom to the said Lesson....., .....................heirs and asdpw, in as food oa dittono and repair as when ..................took them., reasonable wear and taar and damage by the sUments atoms et ptod. .Ind the said Lessor,,.... do- ... oovdnans that the said LessesA..., on paying the rent and per/m7ning the oovenanbts aforesaid, shall and may peaceably and .; •.- OUy N-vo, h..old an -enjoy the-said demised promises for the term afor"atd. 3n Q4estimanp Mbertot, Roth parties havo hems to set their hands and seats the day and year ftrst above wrfttm _ ........................>.,..,.................,..........................,.............,....... { MILLI UDAVIS Co n r71`i`?i I1p (;Cr P$ DO PtOTtiCOPY STANDARD ?j? ? Lt'?W ? $%N of hY cmpyrtght Laws OURCHA E AGREEMENT PINK-Buyers Rmipt 1 _ Richfield Minnesota Noyembpr is ILL- 2. RECEIVED OF City of Richf held _ 3. the sum of One Thousand Five Hundred and No/ 100a Dollars (s 1. San _ t]0 ) 4 by cs+slt? fi "°'.' as earnest money to be deposited the next business clay after acceptance in trust account of listing broker M. (L..,,.99 otherwise specified in writing) and in part payment for the purchase of the premises legally described as 6, gas Exhibit A attached hereto 7. 8. located at (Street Address) 7300 Fir_ st A.venua South. 9. C' Ity of Richfield County of Ha+nneFin , State of Minnesota, 10. including all plants, shrubs and trees, all storm windows and/or inserts, storm doors, screens, awnings, window shades, blinds, curtain- 11. traverse-drapary rods, attached lighting fixtures with bulbs, plumbing fixtures, water heater; heating system stet?it electronic air filter,?tpC7( tf]t1 1i¢?tp? qlg C> 1 water softener, cable television outlets and cabling, BUILT-INS to include: T3 dishwasher, garbage disposal, ISAlaxsita0[?MsdOtei'G?a9ts, hood-fan, intercom, installed carpeting, IF ANY, 14. located on the premises which are the property of Seller and also the following personal property, Anne 16, is, 17, all of which property Salter has this day sold to Buyer for the sum of: $ 68,288.00 18. Sixty-Eight Thousand Two Hundred Eighty-Eight and No1100s Dollars, 19, 20 which Buyer agrees to pay in the following manner, Earnest money of 8 1 •• SS30.00 and 21. B 66 758.00 cash on or before ® November 30,-_ 1957 the date of closing,ataa* c 2.7 W.VxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXxxxxxx WirWW F 23. 24, See Exhibit B, Additional Conditions Pertaining to Sale) 26. --- - 26. 27, W 28. 29. - 30. 31. Attached are ?- addendums which are made a part of this agreement, which are described .as Exhib?,?g A B C D? 32 SUBJECT TO performance by Buyer, Seller egress to execute and deliver a Quit C184A 1Mf[t7tW belid,g t 33 to be joined in by spouse, if any, conveying marketable title to the premises subject only to the o) owing exceptions: 34 (1) Building and zoning laws, ordinances, State and Federal regulations, (2) Restrictions relating to use or improvement of the premises without 35 effective forfeiture provision. (3) Reservation of any minerals or mineral rights to the State of Minnesota. (4) Utility and drainage easements 3& which do not interfere with present improvements. ft igRtaacarf?tarxttDat. 37, it i(i'Kil t]i ?#H$g 1r. XXx lil t > _ srv Kara ?rxxxXxtr r.?rY xaar6ta ltntlxyst ir_ t 39 fl. ? Y 41. iYt3Bt?[11 R Seller warrants that taxes due and payable in the.year 18 87? will be xxxArx2 1==XA A homestead 42 classification, Neither Seller nor Seller's Agent makes any representation Concerning the amount of future real estate taxes, 43. WARRANTIES Seller warrants that buildings, if any, are entirely within the boundary lines of the promises, eitarxa?mmcarI rxhmtm w 44 aliaxR3>Fa?l?ttt6tbast??srsrixc??acadpiQ tmmss?= ??evcaadicsacp?? LAM 45. Buyer has right to Inspect promises prior to closing. Buyer shall satiety Fbon*iketwulck ense that all appliances, heating and air 4F, conditioning, wiring and plumbing are in proper working order before closing. 3tt C31m1; =t,=kad7Cb0 exs as p ter 47. 1 ? Dc>KtA?l4?fX& t x C?4ftlt>it aiit eta t?t?px sa?taQStl ld x t klt?xfta?c4R3clsg7 fi=0fl s>itai XkKIK1J= 48. ?E t1 t }s?tr tx xslra COaeoex dlsaaattizti?ts BayacStxt vlot:€card:?al?a?eaa ladt t=42 ?agtcge, 49 POSSESSION Seller agrees to deliver possession not later than d1te of closing, 50. All1lKMIA, city water and sewer charges, ontotad?ttl tn+at??mt?q?cl a iraati4?r a3t? shall be pro-rated between the 52 partitessaa m ate of c, nef n _ ?t aafd hp[ta XaCttttaalrae iit:ltl ?fdi> c r P*" 53 TITLE & EXAMINATION Seiler shall, within a reasonable time after acceptance of this a regiment, furnish an Abstract of Title, or a 54. Registered Property Abstract, certified to date to include proper searches covering bankruptcies, state and Federal judgments and liens. Buyer 55. shall be allowed 10 business days after receipt for examination of title and making any objections, which shall be made in writing or deemed 56 waived. If any objection is so made, Seller shall be allowed 120 days to make title marketable. Rending correction of title, payments hereunder 57. required shall be postponed, but upon correction of title and within 10 days after written notice to Buyer, the parties shall perform this 58, agreement according to its terms. If title is not corrected within 120 days from the date of written objection, this agreement shall be null and 59 void, at option of Buyer, neither parry shall be liable for damages hereunder to the other, and earnest money shall be refunded to Buyer. 6,0 DEFAULT If title is marketable or is corrected within said time, and Buyer defaults In any of the agreements herein, Seller mayterminate this 61 agreement, and on such termination all payments made hereunder shall be retained by Seller and Agent, as their respective interests mayappear, 62 as liquidated damages, time being of the essence hereof. This provision shall not deprive either party of the right of enforcing the specific performance C,` of this agreement, provided this agreement is not terminated and action to enforce specific performance is commenced within six months after P,4. such right of action arises. In the event Buyer defaults in his performance of the terms of this Agreement, and Notice of Cancellation is 65 served upon the Buyer pursuant to MSA 559, the termination perlod shalt be thirty (30) days as permitted by Subdivision 4 of MSA i?f 5 ;7 ??G>IBspecx?tacara?praa?s?rt#dxilaaxBfa??:..?*aca???t.??,'tt*?itei?r?rt?4?itRl?t?GSt??le?tkl?tR?f?t r;? dta?caX lbixag?araa?I?az?idr?[Rt'iCxtotOas?ft?€?[ r- t?sitxao?Otitse 09 AGENCY DISCLOSURE S-1,11-erBs V09e11ent that they a , St re r? a1 estRtb agent ?Or-,-- 7C. In this transaction. 1plxadtattara xaetetmalarraitimo iarie,remmur[?.r,s?+,.?„e,,,,o,e?td,. _r 71. 1, the owner of the premises, accept this agreement and 72. the sale hereby made. 73. SELLER ? a i'c?__Duaae?gan T City of Richfield greipto purchase the premises for the price and on the terms and conditions set forth above. BUYER 74. SELLER Lori morgan 75 Delivery of all papers and monies shall be made at the office of: 76. Company Pepin Da ton Hergian & Graham. FA 77 Address 930 Dumber Exchange. Ten S. Fifth St. BUYER Selling Agent None city :7nmglip• ' MN Zip 55_401 8 THIS IS A LECIALLY BINDING CONT T. IF NOT UNDERSTOOD, SEEK COMPETENT ADVICE. Mate Ot- .............. nungau............................. .. Lsour dy of ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,X95)51ANX.................................. • On this ................. ...,,.....,.................day of,:................................ 1?ts:,fmbe, _....., 4. D. l'917....., before mo, a .., ....Tfttar,.v.,.Rnblir. ......... . ..........................................................,t....,,,.....714thin and far said county, psrwnabty apWrio i D4v*A. Duane..Morgan..and Lori Morgan,e.... IIMAbjnd and w fR „„............................................. . ........................ .......... to me know to be the persona_ dmaribed in and who execwMd the forejotn¢ Cr zmenf, and acknarwUdged that ..;t.he.,,y. executed A4 same a,r.......... tU iz:........, ..free ,*V' and d 4e4. ...... , .................... ............................, ... ?. Notary Pabuz County of . ............................................................. .? .......... Jfu. Gommiasion easpir" ............................. .,.............. ........... .,, .r.. .......,.. State of,..................................................... - , .... 10 .. Additional conditions; 1. Lessee shall be responasible for insuring agztinrst damage or destruntion of all of that items of perponal property kept or stored on the demised prem- ises. 2. Lessee shall carry liability insurance in an amount acceptable to the city insuring against property damage, personal injury or death. Lessee also hereby indamnifiaR and holds harmleas the Lessor, its officers, agents and employees from and against arty claim for personel injury, property rlnmAgs or death caused by any condition of the dsmi.Red property or, artAing out of the occupancy thereof by Lnesens. 4` yi 'r'E3 w? A4t f i { d` ! i 3. If at any time during the term of thin Lease the prr3misAs or any part thereof shall be dAmaged by fire, wind, storm or other.,caaRuailty in an amount of. $5,000 or more, the LaR.Ror shall have the.right, at its excluRiwe option, to terminate thin Lease and to r.evosst possession in Lesnor. 3 I i E i E { E ! t i • 9W 3deame, Me& ewe d n...? IN.. " I-'7 % &a *40 Pot Z~..-, -I 1-1 .xOE?aA, A+..ArI wA ...11 ft of Mb sewed spoke lIMI+w?+ ?dalavMl. tool Iha add pwlp N ? 1? pars, lw eeaalsar,Mow y ds twaM assn esasaaaw, ha,vo a/lw wwllaod, sa...... hasty DemdM, bar and LM aall sb said p* of sa aswd pad, sal as sdi parsy of 1M Maesd pars sa-- hamly UN aid sew tm of am parse of 00 AW parts as fdbw 64 sMP" psamebrr. sllwaMd M slo t9wwly y..-..:Bars*_31Sn -- r sad pmts y 40aaey ....., else North 105 feet of last 150.48 feat of Went 1/4 of North 10 acres of South 20 acres of Southwest 1/4 of Northeast 1/4 of Section 34, Township 28, aanga 24, except road. And havieg the street address of 7300 - let Ave., So., Richfield, Minnesots. r 6 leer alto M so. no ahem mown PFAMMa maw As MW ZWO aaaglw, pap sad lwiat the tau Mew s1 _.__!1i[ ft?t!.t1u! ._ ?.._._...__..._.r.._. frwia aid sow as day y._.__-.._-..allka st.? sl1Z__, to..aad_11nti1_?' - - ....._.._.............._..._......... 19,1w..UnjA!R.flaill!' f.!1 ?111C!d?7 1.h0 1d!!?!!_.Ypon_tha ti?*i? f ?Q_davs written __ das as sad 14"W a. aim..- of and riok of sold Zwr..-. to par w mil I- of sloes xrwMwud pww- lar As sun a1......LiXA_BWIAL.!14..B?ShfS_L1Xl.illl4_?100 USSS 4? --DOLU N POT worth payable in advance with the first pApeent duo upon execution of this LAAae and monthly psywenta due beginning oo the Brat day of January, 1988, and on the first day of each month thereafter during the t*-w of this Lease. Lenseen shall also pay before penalty attaches All water, earee, electric, gee, telephone And other utility bills. Lessees shall keep and maintain the promises in a state of good repair, and shall surrender thaw in the rendition in which they Vera denieed, ordinary wear and tear excepted. (see back for additional aondltIMM) -»._... ___....._.__._._...».»..» »?_...»... .._ »....._-tb sled dwlmd W t§9 Mrw of Mh Lase. dwd it l1 tarW? a&ad by a1d hoow of Pero" Y jousuiel Thal show of new Ursa a. I" w Nebo oks alaw Mosoona Masao so haven, opaybm, w of pq of mb atsrwpM Whw dw, w fW is tWjjU a" at the asasus is hoots eNNaiesS, /hw a" in, okd a" W Shell In lawtw for as Bald baw_._. w " Woop and who peassig m of as 40" rvwos pwwlaa, ems bis amok sofa W rime. W"h-0 awh rawwrind ywhW a tartmum Of lho raw w be pall and She aaAeaaw it be pwtapmeod Iy lha odd ZMWA.. for as tau torn of an, Zam dad the saki Zmens.a_ Shia ow mand......asi a fres..._. r ad am da add Low- no w otd/a ale bass, or undabe the abaws mood panalsM or say part sapeat, with-* Pot ailatalw/ of WOO seaeal of lha gals LaMr .., and A". . ......... IAM 44 #A AEpireMsw Of She MW M hash AIWAK pW64 ylds glad srrrsodor ohs sterwstd pmmetns w W ssld LMwp...-, ... _._.__. ,holm sod dwi/oh So a pas aaBMw sod repair se uhss...... .-....... ink saw, maaoabb tow amok war wed daisap Sp as ebaeemle aims AarpwL dad ihs sad lawor..... do ......swnosml sal the sold brass.., as payfad the saM sad p?Jlormew/ As sanomeols afersan d, Shan and muy poes ally sad . lads %-Vk held sa4aw/gr deism A06" A pen" M tw ds Mnw $AV"" Ia 940"Maw sk"IC Book par" have Aplomb nd lhair hard/ aid scale of say acs year lied atom MrtiMA *ate ot_._._..xuwmu. .. Om ......_.....__..._ dp, q...._ ?a?.eb.. _ _.. J. A IOV-., M/eq see, • xOrArx.2.aelse........... .... .. ..„..01" a" M 0001 GNP*, PPW"Ur aPpawd 1AXIL Df1R4A..?1USAR...!49A , P.l .M!!?Ra!Ia .. h?D.1l?...Rn4 We to Wit knom to Is the ,wawa.. dewriied In a" WAO amemw the farogwaf 6616% wM. Mi 0dt MWbopd Chet ..tJ4..3r AUMNS the aeaw as.........Lhait..____.fW &W ami daeC. a Txs" AM Ww4 q- ---Mr OeO WJWIem awbra•-?..___ _ ,,., ,1/.._._... 8006 q Additional eonditionat 1. Leease shall be responsible for Insuring against daea$e or destruction of all of thn items of personal property kept or sterad on thn dnmisad prem- iasa. E 2. Lessee shell carvy liability insurance in an amount acceptable to the city insuring against property dsmage, personal injury or death. Lessee also hereby indawnifian and holds baseless tha Lessor, its officers, agnnts and employees from and against any claim for personal injury, property danage or death caused by anyconditioa of tha demised property or &timing out of the occupancy thereof by Lessens. 7. It at any time during the term of this Laabe the pramiaae or any part tharnof shall be damaged by firs, wind, atom or othsr•casualty in an amount of $5,000 or mots, the Lessor shall have the right, at its excluaive option. to terminate thin Lases and to ravest possession in Lesnor. 1? -* A? CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA City Council Letter No. 359 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Approval of a off street parking permit for a temporary parking area at 67th Street and Grand Avenue for Richfield State Agency. Background: Mr. Carl McBride, representing Richfield State Agency, has requested city approval of a temporary parking area for employees of the Richfield Bank and Trust Company. This parking area would be located at 67th Street and Grand Avenue adjacent to the existing parking lot for Richfield Bank and Trust. Access to the temporary parking area would be via the alley from 67th Street. As part of this proposal the house located at 6644 Grand Avenue would be removed and that lot and the adjacent vacant lot owned by Richfield State Agency would be developed as a temporary parking area for 22 additional stalls. Mr. McBride has requested permission to park on the existing grass surface. The parking area would be defined with secured landscape timbers around the perimeter. The house at 6636 Grand Avenue is not owned by Richfield State Agency and would remain. Mr. McBride indicated that Richfield State Agency would make a concerted effort to purchase this property over the winter and then construct the permanent parking improvements on all three lots in accordance with the approved planned unit development plans. Permanent improvements for the temporary parking area would not be installed at this time because of the lateness of the season and because considerable grading and berming is necessary to complete the parking area as planned as part of the planned unit development. The grading and berming cannot be done until such time as the property at 6636 Grand is purchased and the house removed. The house at 6645 Harriet Avenue would remain. Recommended Motion: Deny the request for an offstreet parking permit for a temporary parking area to be located at 67th Street and Grand Avenue for the Richfield State Agency. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Proposed parking area does not meet city standards for parking areas. The proposed parking area would not have the required hard surface nor the perimeter curb. This could present problems in terms of dust or muddy conditions. 2. The proposed area would not properly drain. 10 3. The proposed parking area would not be adequately screened from adjacent residential areas. 4. While the proposed parking use is consistent with the approved planned unit development plan for the area, the layout and access of the area is not consistent with the approved plans. The permanent improvement of the three lots in the future would be consistent with those plans, but there has been no specific indication of the timing of the permanent improvements. Alternative Recommendation: Approve an offstreet parking permit for the proposed temporary parking area subject to the stipulations that: 1. The permanent improvements be completed by June 1, 1988. 2. That the parking area be screened from residential properties in the area. Decision Mode: This matter has been scheduled for City Council consideration on November 23, 1987. Because this is an offstreet parking permit, no public hearing or public hearing notice is required. Respect lly submitted, Jame Prosser City nager 0 JDP/dkh 0 I• 111111 11 +rrEST srn+ sTMET xk S w 4 a Telephone /r7.T-x COMPLETE INSURANCE SERVICES 6625 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH • RICHFIELD BANK BUILDING • RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA 55423 November 13, 1987 Mayor John Hamilton and City Council City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Due to the need for increased parking for the employees of Richfield Bank & Trust Co., Richfield State Agency is requesting to implement the BRW Phase 1. plan for parking as approved, with an exception. We request permission to park on the existing surface. We would define the area with secured landscape.timbers and in the spring proceed with grading and blacktopping. See attached exhibits. If this request is granted, it would provide 12 more spaces immediately and with the removal of the house at 6644, an additional 10 for a total of 22 additional stalls. Thank you, RICHFIELD STATE AGENCY, INC. Carl E. McBride Vice President CEM:mt '• ? rNO'1tf ? - ? I r v / . / J/L ?'? / \ \ I 1 1.1 1A rl 1' `' /•?? If Igj?AVENUE Sbtffii t???' .? - - -ti • -?•• ?.. , I 1111TTTf 1 ?AI I Il? 1 C PEI A a I Ti ItIIIIIFI 1 I I N i NIIIII?I? N -Its ?.? .rwv ? ? 1 rr"•7 I.. CSI I I i 11111111111.1.1.1-0 ujjjj_ V _ - ? GRANO AVENUE?50141.11 ?.•_.. - -`Tj?-?ti7"-« `?" •? _? I I 1 j .s H Ibo?J: 6?w?i6? ?•G ??:_g5? ? ?? ? ?? ???iii?i? ?? i?. H. R?g 6° O ?e;7 FFif•7? ?? ?n? itsw•?•!?.t a o" g.? ? ata?? ?•?; ??0•?rol.rA ? I 1 3 P a 0 =i ? ?i• ¢ r??r wr• , w ?? • Y.ri•?Ow • I`t ieao•ee • •' • +u• 00 ;? CLCLCLLL • i : EBBS.:: V P e.• ••. _? -w-r • ii ri•eo • y • • • • O?O• ? ? •O ?e 400er •O 1' SA ifl O O Or +00 i • ioe•: L: .c w r , : t ?r rr,.i. i i e e..•oe _ . .. C C ,CCCCC:C N .., ..._... N PUtl 111'Ul. I1: Alll/;il •C flnl. U;:E Pl•116A1 IC FIELD STATE AGENCY P11ASE 1 MASIER I100MA 1).MV 4JLSOIA PAIMUGPI AN #/.? 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 358 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Consideration of an ordinance amendment relating to probationary periods. First reading. Background: City Ordinance Code Section 310.15 Administrative; Personnel Subd. 2, Length of probationary period, currently establishes a probationary period of six months for city employees, except for police officers and management personnel, which was established at one year. The purpose of a probationary period, as stated in the provisions of Subd. 1, is to "be utilized for observing the employee's work, for assisting in the adjustment of the employee to his position and for rejecting any employee whose performance does not meet the required performance standards". The city's 1987 General Services pay plan contains a step increase at the end of.the six month probationary period. However, the 1988 General Services pay plan provides for a step • increase after the completion of one year. The fire labor agreement contains a provision for a pay increase after six months of employment and is not affected by this proposed change. The Local 49 agreement covering maintenance employees, which does not have steps, is also not affected by this change. With the implementation of comparable worth and the 1988 pay plans adopted by the council on October 26, 1987, the city will now go to a one year interval between each step of the General Services pay plan. Thus, there is a conflict with the current ordinance provisions. Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of the proposed ordinance, amending Chapter III, Section 310.15, Subd. 2. The city ordinance code entitled "Length of probationary period", and schedule the public hearing and second reading for December 14, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The approved 1988 General Services pay plan has one-year step increases. 2. To standardize the length of probation periods between the Management and General Services pay plans. 3. A one-year probationary period is a more reasonable and sufficient period of time to assess the performance of a General Services employee before permanent status. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Not approve the ordinance amendment increasing the length of the probationary period. Discussion/Decision Mode: This change should be made to bring ordinance provisions in line with approved pay plans for January 1, 1988 and comparable worth implementation to begin on January 1, 1988. Respectfully submitted, Jam Prosser Ci nager JDP/eja 41 0 0 ORDINANCE NO. Amendment to Chapter III, Section 310 of the City Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield, Minnesota. CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: 1. By amending paragraph 15, subdivision 2, Length of probationary period, as follows: Subd. 2. Length of probationary period. The ppebetleAapy ' Employees shall be subject to a probationary period of one year, except as otherwise established by collective bargaining agreements or seasonal employees whose probationary period shall be concurrent with their first full seasonal appointment. The probationary period may be extended once with the approval of the manager for a period not to exceed an additional six months, provided the extension is not in conflict with provisions of applicable civil service rules and regulations or collective bargaining agreements. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of , 1987. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk -*I? 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 357 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: First reading of an ordinance which would provide for substantially unpainted structures to be declared a public nuisance and eligible for abatement procedure. Background: For the past two years the Department of Public Safety has been attempting to correct a problem of an unsightly house on Bryant Avenue. Specifically, the house in question has peeling and cracking paint. Repeated attempts by the Department of Public Safety Inspection Division to request the owner to paint and repair the property have been unsuccessful. To add to the dilemma, the property in question became a HUD property. Through HUD's lengthy process of bidding, the painting season ended and no new owners could assume responsibility for the property. The situation pointed to the need for an ordinance which declares a situation such as this a public nuisance. While the city has adopted the Uniform Housing Code it falls short of addressing peeling and cracking paint as a public nuisance, allowing the city to proceed with an abatement procedure. Abatement process would permit the city, after notification, to remedy the matter and require the property owner to reimburse the city for the cost of repairs. Recommended Motion: Approve first reading of an amendment to the city ordinance Section 925.01, Subd. 4, adding paragraph (g) to the Public Nuisance to include exterior wall surfaces that are more than 20% peeling, cracked or chipped, and schedule the public hearing and second reading for December 14, 1987. Basis of Recommendation: The ordinance provides the enforcement tools necessary for the Department of Public Safety Inspection Division to ensure an aesthetically appealing community. 2. The ordinance provides for abatement procedures for situations involving peeling or cracking paint 3. While the need for abatement may be small, it does need to be addressed at the time and must not be delayed as the one herein mentioned has. Alternate Recommendations: 1. The council could elect not to act at this time and let the city continue to attempt to convince owners to keep their homes painted. However, the city's enforcement posture would be restricted without an abatement procedure. -e V,///- / • Discussion/Decision Mode: If the city council approves the first reading of this ordinance, the public hearing and second reading would be scheduled for the council meeting of December 14, 1987. Respectfully submitted, v Jam D. Prosser Cit anager JDP/eja 0 0 ADDITION TO SECTION 925.01, SUED. 49 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 925.01, Subd.4 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled Public Nuisances is hereby added to include Paragraph (g) to Subd. 4. (g). Exterior wall surfaces of structures which have had a finish such as paint applied and are cracked, peelin or chipped on more than 20% of a wall, or, all door an window moldings and trim, eave projections and gutters on any one side. is Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this day of , 1987. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk 0 J CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 356 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Resolution approving participation in the Joint Powers Agreement Governing Local Government Information Systems (LOGIS) for the purpose of forming a group for the purchase of health insurance for employees. Background: In late October, the City of Richfield, along with the 40 other cities that comprise the Instrumentalities Group under a Hennepin County group plan formed in the early 1970's, discovered through a newspaper article that Hennepin County had proposed that two major health providers be dropped from the plan. They were Physicians Health Plan and MedCenters Health Plan. The instrumentalities (participating cities) were not informed at any time during the process leading up to this decision, and due to the enormous impact on employees (in Richfield, 66% of employees are insured under the two plans targeted to be discontinued), the affected cities met and voted to leave the Hennepin County group. Instead, the cities opted to remain together as a group to purchase health and life insurance. In order to form a legal entity for this purpose in as short a time as possible, it was determined that the LOGIS Joint Powers Agreement could be used to provide the legal requirements for the groups to seek and authorize the purchase of health insurance. It was also agreed that this would be reviewed in the coming year and changes made, if necessary, for the year 1989. However, each participating city must now have official city council ratification of the extensionof the LOGIS agreement to proceed for 1988. In the coming year, the city will study its options in the area of purchasing health insurance to determine what options will be available in 1989. The agreement to remain as a part of the Instrumentalities Group is viewed as an opportunity to give us the time to review the city health insurance needs and programs. The group has received quotes from three health providers - Group Health, MedCenters and Physicians Health. These plans will continue to be offered to our employees in 1988, causing no disruption in health coverages. Recommended Motion: Approve the resolution to participate in the Joint Powers Agreement Governing Local Government Information Systems (LOGIS). • Basis of Recommendation: No cos to loin. 2. Lack of time to establish other alternatives. 3. Favorable insurance costs bid by providers. 4. No disruption of coverages for employees. • Alternative Recommendation: None Discussion/Decision Mode: The council needs to take action at its November 23, 1987 meeting in order to meet open enrollment requirements. Respectf lly submitted, Prosser James tMager City JDP/eja 0 • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PARTICIPATION IN THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT GOVERNING LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS (LOGIS) WHEREAS, in 1972 a number of communities of the State of Minnesota identified benefits including cost, effectiveness and efficiency of joining together to cooperatively provide for the establishment, operation and maintenance of data processing facilities and management information systems for the use and benefit of the parties and others; and, WHEREAS, the consortium has further determined that a necessary adjunct of management information systems is providing information and data pertaining to health care options as part of employee benefits; and, WHEREAS, the members of LOGIS have determined through their Executive Committee that the management of information pertaining to health care options is interwoven with the selection and operation of such plans and that jointly contracting for such plan operation is a necessary and appropriate role for LOGIS; and, WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has determined that it is to its benefit to participate in LOGIS as an associate member with the initial intent of participating in the coordination of employee health care planning and service selection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Richfield authorizes the City Manager and Mayor to execute the LOGIS Joint and Cooperative Agreement, and appoints the City Manager and Administrative Services Director to serve as its Director and Alternate Director respectively on the LOGIS Board of Directors. Adopted this 23rd day of November, 1987. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 355 Agenda, November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Adoption of a resolution amending Resolution No. 7346 adopting a budget for the year 1988 and levying taxes. Background: During the month of September, 1987, the city council considered and adopted the city's 1987 revised and 1988 proposed budget. As a part of that budget adoption process, the council also adopted the ad valorem tax levy as set forth by the Minnesota State Department of Revenue (levy limit). As the city council was considering the budget, the State of Minnesota was considering an appeal for an exception to the city's levy limit, due to costs attributable to comparable worth costs and the city's share of storm water damage sustained in July, 1987. Initially, the Commissioner of Revenue denied the city's request, but upon further consideration, the city received notification in mid October that a portion of the city's tax levy limit appeal had been approved. The initial appeal which centered upon three separate issues: (1) loss of revenue sharing, • (2) cost of implementing comp worth, and (3) additional costs incurred by the city because of flood damage, was finally approved in the amount of $195,000. Staff has reviewed the budget and the actual local cost of flood damage repairs. It would appear that our share (15%) of local cost of flood damage repairs will approximate no more than $50,000, and comparable worth costs in the initial year will approximate $85,00 to $90,000. Based upon this information, the city is recommending an increase of $125,000 on the tax levy. The increase in the tax levy previously proposed as part of the 1988 budget was approximately $452,948. Initially, it was estimated that the 1988 budget would require an increase of approximately one mill in the city's portion of the tax levy. The addition of the $125,000 is estimated to increase the mill levy by an additional one-half mill. This total mill and one-half increase is 6.5% in the city's and HRA;'s combined 1987 mill rate of 21.74 mills. However, it should be noted that any estimates of mill rate increases are only estimates at this time. Sometime after January 1, 1988, the actual assessed value figures, as well as the net distribution from fiscal disparities, will be released which will establish an exact mill rate. Concurrently, it appears that the Richfield School District is estimating a tax rate increase of seven or eight mills and Hennepin County anticipates a two to three mill increase. Recommendation Motion: Adopt a resolution readopting the budget for the year 1988 and levying taxes by increasing the levy limit by $125,000. 0 Basis of Recommendation: 1. The city has incurred certain costs associated with comparable worth implementation and storm damage which qualify for an exemption to the state tax levy limit base limitation. 2. The city requested and received an amended levy limit from the Department of Revenue based upon these qualifying costs of an additional $195,000. 3. The city staff estimates that actual costs based on the above-referenced items will cost $125,000 for 1988. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The city council could approve a levy base increase of $195,000 a approved by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. 2. The city council could elect to maintain the previously adopted city budget and levy limits thereby not levying any part of the $195,000 levy limit appeal amount. 0 meeting. Discussion/Decision Mode: Contact with Hennepin County indicates that the increased tax levy, if approved by the council, should be filed no later than November 24, 1987. Therefore, the city council will need to take action on this item on the November 23, 1987 city council Respectfully submitted, Jame D. Prosser City anager JDP/eja 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 7370 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 7346 ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE YEAR 1988 AND LEVYING TAXES E WHEREAS, on September 23, 1987, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7346 "Resolution Adopting a Budget for the Year 1988 and Levying Taxes" and WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 7346 provides that the amount of $5,701,898 be levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax in the year 1987, payable in 1988, and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota Commission of Revenue on October 13, 1987 approved a levy limit base adjustment of $195,000 for the year 1988 due to the increased cost of comparable worth and emergency costs due to 1987 storm damage, and WHEREAS, an additional levy increase of $125,000 is necessary to cover the costs associated with 1988 comparable worth implementation and the city's portion of storm damage costs; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield as follows: 1. The budget for the City of Richfield for the year 1988 is hereby approved and adopted with appropriations for each of the departments to be as follows: GENERAL FUND • Legislative Executive Administrative Services Community Development Public Safety Community Services $ 391,490 355,360 876,850 225,610 5,248,270 3,840,240 TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE SHARING FUND $10,937,820 2. The estimated gross revenue of the City of Richfield from all sources, including general ad valorem tax levies as here- inafter set forth for the year 1988, which are more fully detailed in the City Manager's official copy of the budget, are hereby found and determined to be as follows: GENERAL FUND $10,937,820 REVENUE SHARING FUND 3. There is hereby levied upon all taxable property in the City of Richfield a direct ad valorem tax in the year 1987, payable in 1988 for the following purposes and in the following amounts: PURPOSE GENERAL FUND* AMOUNT $5,826,898 Provision has been made in the General Fund for the payment of the city's contributory share to Public Employees' Retirement Association and the Police and Fireman's Relief Associations. Provision has also been made in the General Fund revenues for a general levy which includes a debt service levying in the amount of $196,191 for Bonds of 1977, 1983 and 1985. See separate resolutions on other bond issues. 4. A certified copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the County Auditor. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 23 day of November, 1987. ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk John Hamilton Mayor 0 6 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 354 November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Public Hearing on a Resolution giving approval to the issuance of a $3,865,000 Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project) Series 1987A and $890,000 Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project) Series 1987B. Background: The purpose of the bonds is to refund (refinance) bonds that the city issued in 1983 to finance the Corporate Travel Services building at 1401 76th Street in the City. The new issues will enable the owner of the project to achieve substantially lower interest rates on the financing of the project, thus making it more financially feasible. The bonds will be purchased by Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc. for resale to the public. The City Attorney's office has reviewed the documents being approved by the resolution and reports that they are in proper form. All costs of the refunding will be borne by the owner of the project. • For technical reasons, the adoption of the resolution must be preceded by a public hearing on the issuance of the bonds. The resolution may be adopted after the public hearing is closed. Recommendation: Conduct a Public Hearing and subsequently adopt the attached resolution authorizing issuance of Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds for the Corporate Travel Building Project. Basis for Recommendation: Corporate Travel has requested the issuance of refunding bonds to enable the project to take advantage of substantially lower interest rates, thus making the project more financially feasible. 2. The refunding should have no adverse impact upon the City or be of any cost to the city. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The city council could object to the refunding issue. However, it would appear that such an objection would not be of benefit to the city. 0 • Discussion/Decision Mode: A Notice of Public Hearing has been hearing on this matter on November this matter at that date will allow this refunding issue. JDP:sb published for a public 232 1987. Consideration of the expedient processing of Jame D. Prosser Cit anager Respectfully submitted, • • CERTIFICATE OF MINUTES RELATING TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (CORPORATE TRAVEL BUILDING PROJECT) SERIES 1987 A and SERIES 1987 B Issuer: City of Richfield, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting, held on November 23, 1978, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at the City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Documents attached: RESOLUTION NO. • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (CORPORATE TRAVEL BUILDING PROJECT) SERIES 1987 A AND SERIES 1987 B AND THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, does certify that the documents asttached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records in my legal custody from which they have been transcribed; that such documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of the Issuer, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and or all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to the above obligations; and that such meeting, was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. Dated: November , 1987. 0 City Clerk Council member introduced the following resolution and moved i.ts a option: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (CORPORATE TRAVEL BUILDING PROJECT) SERIES 1987 A AND SERIES 1987 B AND THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE ITS RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Authorization and Recitals. 1.01. General Authority. The City has previously issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 474, as amended (the "Prior Act"), its Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel Building) Series A, dated as of February 1, 1983 in the original principal amount of $3,900,000, of which $3,865,000 is currently outstanding (the "Prior Series A Bonds"), and its Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel Building) Series 1987 B, dated as of December 1, 1982 in the original principal amount of $900,000, of which $890,000 is currently outstanding (the "Prior Series B Bonds"). Pursuant to • Minnesota Statues, Sections 469.153 through 469.166 (the "Act") the City is authorized to issue its obligations to refund obligations issued under the Act or Prior Act. Proceeds of the Prior Series A Bonds and Prior Series B Bonds were used to finance the acquisition, construction and installation of a five-story commercial office building and adjacent parking facility (the "Project") located at 1401 West 76th Street, Richfield, Minnesota, of which Dacotah Properties, a Minnesota general partnership, is the current beneficial owner (the "Prior Company"). The Prior Company intends to convey the Project to Dacotah Properties - Richfield, a Minnesota general partnership (the "Company") which has the same partners as the Prior Company. 1.02. Proposed Bonds. Representatives of the Company have proposed that the City, acting pursuant to the Act, issue and sell its Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project) Series 1987 A in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,865,000 (the "Series A Bonds") to redeem and prepay on February 1, 1988 all Prior Series A Bonds. It is also proposed that the City, acting pursuant to the Act, issue and sell its Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (Corporate Travel Building Project) Series 1987 B in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $890,000 to redeem and prepay on December 1, 1987 all Prior • Series B Bonds. Collectively, the Series A Bonds and the Series B Bonds are referred to as the "Bonds." Proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned for the foregoing purposes by the City to the Company, and the Company will agree to make payments sufficient to pay the principal and purchase price of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds when due. To secure payments due in respect of the Bonds the City will grant a security interest in certain revenues and payments to be received by the City under the Loan Agreement (as hereinafter defined) to the Trustee (as hereinafter defined). Section 1.03. Prior Bonds and Project Lease. The Series A Bonds were issued pursuant to an Indenture of Trust, dated as of February 1, 1983, between the City and First Trust Company, Inc. as trustee (the "Series A Indenture") and the Series B Bonds were issued pursuant to an Indenture of Trust, dated as of December 1, 1982 between the City and First Trust Company, Inc., as trustee (the "Series B Indenture"). To facilitate the redemption of the Series A Bonds it is proposed that the City adopt a Supplemental Indenture to amend the Series A Indenture in a manner which does not prejudice any holders of Series A Bonds. To faciliate the redemption of the Series A Bonds it is proposed that the City adopt a Supplemental Indenture to amend the Series B Indenture in a manner which would not prejudice the holder of any Series B Bonds. A notice of redemption has been given calling all Series B Bonds for redemption on December 1, • 1987 at a price equal to the principal amount thereof, plus accrued interest. Series A Bonds will be called for redemption on February 1, 1988 at a price equal to their principal amount, plus accrued interest, plus a premium equal to 2% of the principal called early for redemption. The City currently holds title to the Project as security for the Series A Bonds and leases the Project to the Prior Company pursuant to Lease dated as of February 1, 1982 (the "Lease"). The Prior Company has an option to purchase the Project upon discharge of the Series A Bonds and the payment of One Dollar. 1.04. Documentation. Forms of the following documents relating to the Project, the Bonds and redemption of the Prior Series A Bonds or Prior Series B Bonds have been prepared and submitted to this Council and are hereby directed to be filed in the office of the City Clerk: (a) a Loan Agreement (the "Loan Agreement"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into between the City and the Company; (b) an Indenture of Trust (the "Indenture"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into between the City and First Trust Company, Inc. (the "Trustee"); -2- • (c) a form of Bond for each series; (d) an Escrow Agreement (the "Escrow Agreement"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into among the City, the Trustee and the Company; (e) a Supplemental Indenture relating to the Series A Bonds (the "Series A Supplemental Indenture"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into between the City and the Trustee; (f) an Amendment of Lease (the "Lease Amendment"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into between the City and the Company; (g) a Supplemental Indenture relating to the Series B Bonds (the "Series B Supplemental Indenture"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987 and entered into between the City and the Trustee; (h) a Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement"), proposed to be dated December 1, 1987, and entered into among the City, the Company and Miller & Schroeder Financial, Inc. (the "Purchaser"); and . (i) a form of final Official Statement relating to the Bonds (the "Official Statement"). Section 1.05. Public Hearing. On the date hereof, in accordance with Section 4 f o the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, the City Council has conducted a public hearing on the issuance of the Bonds, which public hearing was preceded by published notice thereof at least fourteen (14) days prior to the public hearing, in a newspaper circulating generally in the City and at the public hearing all parties were given an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposed issuance of the Bonds and the Project. The City Council hereby ratifies and confirms the notice of the public hearing. Section 2. Approval of Documents. The forms of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture, the Escrow Agreement, the Series A Supplemental Indenture, the Lease Amendment, the Series B Supplemental Indenture, and the Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Issuer Documents") are hereby approved. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby directed upon the request of the Company to execute the Issuer Documents on behalf of the City. Copies of the Issuer Documents shall be delivered, filed and recorded as provided therein. The Mayor, City Manager and City Clerk are also authorized and directed to execute such other instruments and certificates as may be required to give effect to the transactions herein or therein contemplated. -3- Section 3. Official Statement. The Bonds will be offered for sale by the Official Statement, a draft of which has been presented to this Council. The City hereby consents to the distribution of the Official Statement in substantially the form of such draft (duly completed to reflect the. terms of the Bonds herein authorized) to prospective purchasers of the Bonds. The City has not participated in the preparation of the Official Statement or the preliminary Official Statement dated November 16, 1987, has made no independent investigation with respect to the information contained therein and assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of such information. The prior use of such preliminary Official Statement is hereby ratified. Section 4. The Bonds; Terms, Sale and Execution; Redemption of Prior Bonds. 4.01. Authorization; Price. The City hereby authorizes the issuance of the Bonds of each series in the aggregate principal amount above stated or so much thereof as shall in the opinion of Leonard, Street and Deinard as Bond Counsel, qualify for tax exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture and this Resolution. The Bonds are hereby authorized to be sold to the Purchaser at the price and upon the terms contained in the Indenture and in accordance with the terms of the Bond Purchase Agreement. • 4.02. Terms. All terms of the Bonds, including their interest rates, series, dates, manner and medium of payment, registration procedures, redemption dates, manner of execution, form and other terms, covenants and conditions, shall be as provided in the Indenture, which is hereby incorporated in its entirety herein and shall constitute a part of this Resolution, provided that the initial interest on the Bonds shall be determined by the Company and Purchaser and shall not exceed an initial rate of 9% per annum. 4.03. Execution. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed, to execute the Bonds as prescribed herein and in the Indenture and to deliver them to the Trustee, together with a certified copy of this Resolution, the other documents required in the Indenture, and such other certificates, documents and instruments as may be appropriate to effect the transactions herein contemplated, but only upon satisfaction of the conditions precedent to such issuance set forth in the Indenture or the conditions precedent to the Purchaser's obligations to purchase the Bonds set forth in the Bond Purchase Agreement. 4.04. Redemption of Prior Bonds and Conveyance of Project; Discharge. The call for redemption of the Series B Bonds is 0 -4- hereby ratified and confirmed. The Mayor and the City Manager, singly or in combination, are hereby directed upon due exercise of the Prior Company's option to purchase the Project to convey the same to the Prior- Company by Quit Claim Deed. Upon execution of the Escrow Agreement the Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute such certificates and instruments as may be necessary to terminate the interest of the City in the Project to be terminated and to discharge the lien of the Series B Indenture. 4.05. Modifications, Absence of Officers. The approval hereby given to the various documents referred to above, including the Bonds, includes an approval of such modifications thereof, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary and appropriate and approved by the Bond Counsel and the City Manager prior to the execution and delivery of the documents. The execution of any instrument by the appropriate officer or officers of the City herein authorized shall be conclusive evidence of the approval of such documents in accordance with the terms hereof. In the absence or disability of any officer or employee of the City, any of the documents authorized by this Resolution to be executed by such person may be executed by any other person who is approved by the City Attorney or who is otherwise permitted by law to execute such documents. Section 5. Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor, City Manager, City Clerk and other "officers of the City are authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser and Bond Counsel certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and matters authorized herein, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officer's custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. Section 6. Limitations of the City's Obligations. Notwith- standing anything contained in the Issuer Documents or the Bonds, the Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation, and shall not be payable from nor charged upon any funds other than the revenues pledged to the payment thereof, and no holder of the Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Bonds or the premium, if any, or interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City other than those rights and interests of the City under the Loan Agreement which have been pledged to • the payment thereof. The agreement of the City to perform the -5- the Issuer Documents shall be subject at all times to the availability of revenues furnished by the Company sufficient to pay all costs of such performance or the enforcement thereof, and the City shall not be subject to any personal or pecuniary liability thereon. Adopted: November 23, 1987. Approved: Mayor Attest: 0 • City Clerk City Manager -6- * /j?j • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 353 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Request for reconsideration of the denial of an amendment to the Market Plaza final development plan concerning signage for the Blockbuster Video store. Background: On August 10, 1987, the City Council denied a request for an amendment to the final development plan for the Market Plaza Development to allow the placement of a sign on the east end of the building for Blockbusters Video. The Planning Commission had recommended denial of the amendment for the proposed signage also. The basis for the applicant's request for reconsideration is the following: 1. Under normal zoning for a shopping center of this type in Richfield, signage would be allowed on the east end of the building. 2. Signage is critical to the success of Blockbuster's large volume concept and may be contributing to the slow sales at their Market Plaza location. 3. It was represented to the applicant that signage would be allowed for Blockbuster on the east side of the building and this was incorporated into their lease. 4. The central issue in the previous council hearing regarding signage focused on the size of the letters and the sign band rather than the issue of signage on the east end of the building. The applicant feels that attention should be focused on this issue alone and it is critical to the Blockbuster concept and success. 5. Sales are extremely slow at Blockbuster and they believe the signage is a critical issue. 6. The applicant feels that the Blockbuster Video store is important to the success of their project. Leasing at Market Plaza has been proceeding much slower than projected and has not achieved a break even situation yet. This, added to their parking problem, creates a situation where major tenants are doing poorly in the short run and may be beginning to look for solutions such as breaking their leases. Recommended Motion: Not reconsider his issue and let the final development plan denial stand. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The signage being proposed would detract from the visual appearance of the building. The urban design elements of the Lyndale Hub Nicollet area indicate that the sign should be designed as an intergral part of the building, be in design proportion with the building, and should be placed so that they relate well with other signs on the building. 2. The plans approved for the project indicated that signage would be within a uniform sign band or on awnings on the 66th Street side of the building. As the structure has developed, some of the uniformity of signage has been lost and detracts from the appearance and the goals of the LHN area. 3. The proposed changes would further detract from the appearance of the building. Alternative Recommendation: Approve a final development plan amendment to allow the Blockbusters Video to place a sign on the east end of the building. Decision Mode: A council public hearing on this matter is scheduled for November 23, 1987. Mailed and published notice of this hearing has been provided. JDP/dkh Respectfu ly submitted, James D Prosser City Ma ger 0 X41 ,t- --, October 27, 1987 Mr. Rick Joepke, City Planner City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue South Richfield, MN 55423 Dear Rick: E. J. Plesko & Associatc:,, Inc. Real Estate Development, Consulting and Managcmcnt 340 Parkdalc Plaza, 1660 South Hwh%ta,. RX) Minneapoli.,, Minnesota 5 416 W -;41101i1 This letter will serve as Market Plaza Commercial Limited Partnership's (MPCLP) formal request for the City Council of Richfield to rehear the issue regarding commercial signage for Blockbuster Video on the east side of Market Plaza. MPCLP fully realizes that the City Council had denied this request previously but believes there are several circumstances that need additional review. Blockbuster Video is an expanding national video franchise. They provide quality movies and run an excellent operation. They are extremely important to Market Plaza as they anchor the east end of the center where we have had the slowest leasing activity. Blockbuster, as part of their store criteria, requires two forms of exterior signage as they originally wanted to be on the pylon sign in the front of Market Plaza. Due to height restrictions, City code dictated that this alternative could not be used and the only other option was additional signage on the east side of the building. MPCLP immediately contacted Sivert Hendrickson from the City and was told that there is nothing prohibiting signage on the east side of the building. He did indicate, however, that the size of the sign may be restricted but not the location. Hence, language was added to-the lease which allowed Blockbuster signage on the east side of the building and they were satisfied that the details would be worked out later. Signage is critical to Blockbuster and without it they feel their concept cannot work. The Market Plaza location is turning out to be their slowest location and it is becoming a major concern to them. Specifically, there are a number of reasons that MPCLP feels justified in requesting a rehearing of the signage issue: 1. Under normal zoning for a shopping center of this type in Richfield, signage would be allowed on the east end of the building. 2. Signage is critical to the success of Blockbuster's large volume concept and may be contributing to the slow sales at their Market Plaza location. 3. It was represented to MPCLP by the City that signage would be allowed for Blockbuster on the east side of the building and, hence, this was incorporated into their lease. 4 1:71j6 -3 Mr. Rick Joepke, City Planner Page 2 October 27, 1987 4. The central issue in the previous council hearing regarding the signage focused on the size of the letters and sign band rather than the issue of signage on the east end of the building. Hence, MPCLP feels that attention should be focused on this issue alone as it is critical to the Blockbuster concept and success. 5. Sales are extremely slow at Blockbuster and they feel that signage is a critical issue. As you may know, leasing at Market Plaza has been proceeding much slower. than projected and thus has not achieved a break-even situation yet. This, added to our parking problem, creates a situation where your major tenants are doing so poorly in the short run that they begin looking for solutions (i.e. breaking their lease). MPCLP and Blockbuster are prepared to work with the City and design an attractive and conforming sign on the east side of the building. Please put this matter on the City Council Agenda as soon as possible. All concerned parties will be present. Thank you for your consideration on this very important matter. is Sincerely, E. J. PLESKO & ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael F. Gould Market Plaza Commercial Limited Partnership MFG:blc cc: E. J. Plesko Jeff Shear, Blockbuster Video • 0 • zz. I IN ?Ef? } i} ! l?l l ijl! lf r ;l ' ! I t f i :f ?ij +{ fi?i I'I I `? li t ji,1' t ? i `'' }'} +j x'!'11 ?i'• I ` lE??li?,l11 I?,i! i?!I'I i' i El ? I Iii I 1(1 i cif ,1' ( !' '! !' ?! ? i I! I;?;I ll !} li r! ! f?l!'?'I I 111l?!. {t`` 'lE+Ir,f tl (i ilEl?e !!' I11(j !'I r , 1 ?ItFI? j E?li1I•, f ' , _j f ?1 11 ! I ! ?iI' ' t 1 ( 7 -I!!? E{S I?I i .ii ;t ' "lijl1 ! (IIi•' (,??111ii?i I '-II ?' 't '?{ili Ii j11?il ?IIi! }; i,l, f 11'E?{ 1 111 ? 1 I: ' III ! '' ?1 Ifl?,!1111 ;? .j I! 1? i. •i, {} II. I 1 't' 1 I I 1 ' 1 I j ,,?? I! ail ( `;?IlE ! Iii(f ?}1 I! ! II Ij ( Ii i;` !?lI1; il1;if Ili I ` ?'(j ? ?Ii +`i l!' ? ?i? I• j'?Ifi tf I!lil .. "i i E f?i.l I Irl , I !'ill pia { ,? IN, J L qlq" Ll! J' cr- Q 14/ y 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 352 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Request for continuance of council reconsideration of the denial of a conditional use permit at 6601 Penn Avenue Background: On September 14, 1987 the City Council denied a request from Amoco Oil Company for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a detached accessory car wash structure at their 6601 Penn Avenue site. Subsequent to that meeting, Amoco Oil Company requested that the council reconsider this denial. A public hearing concerning this matter has been scheduled for the November 23, 1987 City Council meeting. Mailed and published notice of this hearing has been provided to property owners in the area. On Friday, November 20, 1987 the city staff was notified that Amoco wished to continue this matter until the council meeting of January 25, 1988. . Recommended Motion: Continue the hearing for reconsideration of the denial of a conditional use permit at 6601 Penn Avenue until January 25, 1988. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has requested the continuance and will not be present at the November 23, 1987 city council meeting. 2. Notice of the public hearing has been published in the official newspaper. Therefore, the hearing should be opened and continued to January 25, 1988. Decision/Discussion Mode: This item is scheduled for the November 23, 1987 city council meeting. Respectfully submitted, Jam D. Prosser City Manager JDP/eja U • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 351 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Renewal of 1988 On-Sale Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses for North Star Pizza Corporation d/b/a Shakey's Pizza Restaurant, located at 500 E. 78th Street. Background : On November 3, 1987, the city received the renewal applications for the on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses for Shakey's Pizza Restaurant. The required license fees were submitted with the applications. The corporate structure of the organization remains unchanged. Mr. Richard Lupu continues to serve as President and sole interest holder of the corporation as well as on-premises manager of the establishment, while his wife Jerilyn Lupu serves as Vice- President of the corporation. Neither of these individuals have any known criminal record. The background investigation determined that all 1987 real estate, state withholding and sales taxes have been paid and are • current. The property continues to be owned by the A. J. Bogen Company. The lease agreement between the applicant and the landlord continues to be in effect with all payments current. The required $5,000 surety bond has been submitted and indicates that Continental Insurance Company is carrier of this bond. A certificate of insurance detailing both the public and liquor liability coverages has been supplied to the city. Transcontinental Insurance Company is affording the required coverage. The applicant has also supplied proof of worker's compensation insurance coverage. The applicant has supplied a statement detailing a breakdown of sales for the previous twelve month period as follows: Food Sales: $830,852 (95% of total) Beverage Sales: 42,820 ( 5% of total) Total Sales: 873,672 From November 1986 through October 1987, there were 9 public safety contacts with Shakey's as compared to 16 contacts for the previous year. They are as follows: 1986 1987 . Criminal Contacts 8 1 Non-Criminal Contacts 8 8 Total Contacts 16 9 The one criminal contact involved a disorderly individual. • Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses for North Star Pizza Corporation dba Shakey's Pizza Restaurant, 500 E. 78th Street. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the provisions of both the city ordinances and state statutes pertaining to on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset to the community. Alternatives: !-.The council could decide to continue the hearing. 2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses requested. However, reasonable cause for the denial should be presented. Decision Mode: The public hearing to consider the request for the renewals of all on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses has been scheduled for November 23, 1987. These licenses expire January 1, 1988. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond November 23, 1987, any subsequent hearing must be held before the license expires. • Respect ly submitted, James Prosser City Ma ger JDP/eja 0 1 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 350 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Renewal of 1988 On-Sale Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses for Prest Motor Inn, Inc., d/b/a Park Inn International- das Stuberl, located at 7640 Cedar Avenue South. Background: On November 3, 1987, received the renewal applications for the on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses for Park Inn International-das Stuberl. The required license fees were submitted with the applications. The corporate structure of the organization remains unchanged. Mr. John Prest serves as Corporate President and Treasurer, while his wife Sara Prest, serves as Corporate Vice-President and Secretary. Both John and Sara Prest continue to reside in Florida. During 1987, Ms. Robin Boller replaced Mr. Jeffrey Henrich as Manager of the motel and restaurant. None of these individuals have any known criminal record. The background investigation conducted by the Public Safety is Department has determined that all 1987 real estate, state withholding and sales taxes have been paid and are current. The property is owned by John Prest and has a market value of $1,590,000. The required $5,000 surety bond has been submitted and indicates that Western Surety Company is carrier of this bond. A certificate of insurance detailing both the public and liquor liability coverages has been supplied to the city. This certificate shows the General Casualty Company and Transcontinental Insurance Company as affording the required coverages. The applicant has also supplied proof of worker's compensation insurance coverages. The applicant has supplied a statement detailing sales for the previous twelve month period as follows: Food Sales: $2579026.00 (93%) Beverage Sales: 182821.00 ( 7%) Total Sales: $2752847.00 From November 1986 through October 1987, there were 21 Public Safety contacts with Park Inn as compared to 25 contacts for the previous year. Contacts were as follows: 1986 1987 Criminal 16 10 Non-Criminal 9 11 Total Contacts 25 21 • Of the 10 criminal contacts there were no reported incidence involving liquor or beer. In addition, all of the criminal contacts involved the motel operation, and not the restaurant. Recommended Motion: Approval the renewal of on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses for Prest Motor Inn, Inc., dba Park Inn International das Stuberl, 7640 Cedar Avenue. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the provision of both the city ordinances and state statutes pertaining to on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset to the community. Alternatives: 1. The council could decide to continue the hearing. 2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses requested. However, reasonable cause for the denial should be presented. Decision Mode: The public hearing to consider the request for the renewals of all on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses has been scheduled for 40 November 23, 1987. These licenses expire January 1, 1988. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond November 23, 1987, any subsequent hearing must be held before the licenses expire. Respectfully submitted, James D. rosser City Manager JDP/eja • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 349 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Renewal of 1988 On-Sale Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses for Miller's Fireside Pizza Inc., 6736 Penn Avenue Background: On October 28, 1987, the city received the renewal application for the on-sale.wine and 3.2 beer licenses for Miller's Fireside Pizza. The required license fees were submitted with the applications. The corporate structure of the organization remains unchanged. Mr. David Miller continues to serve as Corporate President, Treasurer and Manager; while his mother Lucille Miller, serves as Corporate Vice-President and Secretary. Neither of these individuals have any known criminal record. The background investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department has determined that all 1987 real estate, state withholding and sales taxes have been paid and are current. The property and building continue to be owned by the Millers. • The required five thousand dollar surety bond has been submitted and indicates that United Fire & Casualty Company is carrier of this bond. A certificate of insurance detailing both the public and liquor liability coverages has been supplied to the city. This certificate lists the St. Paul Companies as affording the required coverages. The applicant has also supplied proof of worker's compensation insurance coverage. An accountant's statement has been prepared and submitted by Mr. Richard Ellsworth of the George M. Hansen Company, P.A. This statement covers the period from October 1, 1986 to September 1, 1987 and indicates that food sales accounted for 93% of the total sales, while beer and wine sales account for 7% of the total sales. From November 1986 through October 1987, there were 3 Public Safety contacts with Miller's as compared to 8 contacts for the previous year. Of these 3 contacts, only 1 was of a criminal nature and that involved a theft. Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses for Miller's Fireside Pizza, Inc., 6736 Penn Avenue. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the provisions of both the city ordinances and state statutes pertaining to on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset to the community. Alternatives: 1. The council could decide to continue the hearing. 2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses requested. However, reasonable cause for the denial should be presented. . Decision Mode: The public hearing to consider the request for the renewals for all on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses has been scheduled for November 23, 1987. These licenses expire January 1, 1988. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond November 23, 1987, any subsequent hearing must be held before the license expires. Respectfully submitted, James rosser City IMager • JDP/eja 0 :9? 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 348 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Renewal of 1988 On-Sale Wine and Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses for Davanni's, Inc. d/b/a Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies, 2312 W. 66th Street. Background: On November 12, 1987, the city received the renewal applications for the on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses for Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies. The required license fees were submitted with the applications. The corporate structure of the organization remains unchanged. Mr. Gladstone M. Stenson continues to serve as Corporate President; Mr. Roger Schelper serves as Vice-President and Secretary; and Mr. Robert W. Carlson serves as Treasurer. During 1987 Ms. Gail P. Webster replaced Ms. Judith Dearborn as Manager of the Richfield restaurant. Ms. Webster has been an employee of Davanni's while attending college since 1979 and has been an Assistant Manager since 1983. None of these individuals have any known criminal record. The background investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department has determined that all 1987 real estate, state withholding and sales taxes have been paid and are current. The property and building continue to be owned by Hwy. #52 Embers, Inc., and the lease agreement between the applicant and the landlord continues to be in effect with all payments current. The required $5,000 surety bond has been submitted and indicates that Transamerica Insurance Company is the carrier of this bond. A certificate of insurance detailing both the public and liquor liability coverages has been supplied to the city. This certificate lists the Transcontinental Insurance Company as affording the required coverages. The applicant has also supplied proof of worker's compensation insurance coverage. The applicant has provided a statement showing the total sales from September 29, 1986 through September 27, 1987 as follows: Food Sales $608,520 (91%) Beverage Sales 62,754 ( 9%) Total Sales $671,574 From November 1986 through October 1987 there were five public safety contacts with Davanni's as compared to three contacts for the previous year. Of these five contacts, three were of a criminal nature. One involved a disorderly conduct incident, the other involved a malicious mischief situation and the third involved harassing telephone calls. 0 Recommended Motion: Approve the renewal of the on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses for Davanni's, Inc. dba Davanni's Pizza and Hot Hoagies, 2312 West 66th Street. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The applicant has complied with the provisions of both the city ordinance and state statutes pertaining to on-sale wine 3.2 beer licenses. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the business is an asset to the community. Alternatives: 1. The council could decide to continue the hearing. 2. The council could decide to deny the renewal of the licenses requested. However, reasonable cause for the denial should be presented. Decision Mode: The public hearing to consider the request for the renewals for all on-sale wine and 3.2 beer licenses has been scheduled for November 23, 1987. These licenses expire January 1, 1988. Therefore, if the council decides to continue the hearing regarding the renewal of these licenses beyond November 23, 19872 • any subsequent hearing must be held before the license expires. Respec ully submitted, Jam Prosser City Manager JDP/eja • CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 347 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Acknowledgement of public hearing to consider renewal of on-sale wine and non-intoxicating malt liquor licenses for Frogi's Sandwich Shop Inc. d/b/a Spanky's, 6344 Penn Avenue. Background: On-sale wine and beer licenses for several establishments will expire December 31, 1987. A public hearing notice, scheduling the hearings for November 23, was published in the official newspaper. Subsequent to the scheduling of the hearing, the city was notified that Spanky's will not seek renewal of these licenses. Recommended Motion: Cancel the hearing for the renewal of on-sale wine and non- intoxicating malt liquor licenses for Spanky's, 6344 Penn Avenue. Basis for Recommendation: • 1. Notice of hearing has been published in the official newspaper. However, as Spanky's does not wish to renew the the licenses, no hearing is necessary. Discussion/Decision Mode: The hearing has been scheduled for November 23, 1987. Respectf lly submitted, James D. Prosser City Ma ager JDP/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 346 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Resolution designating city's contribution toward health, term life and dental insurance premium for General Services and Management employees. Background: At the present time, the city contributes to the cost of premiums for four kinds of insurance coverages available to city employees. General Service and Management employee contributions are discussed within this letter. Other employees are covered under the terms of labor agreements. A $10,000 term life insurance policy is provided for all General Services and Management employees. The $10,000 limit was first implemented in 1985, and is recommended to remain at that level through 1989. The city now pays the full premium for this insurance, which was $1.80 per month per employee for 1987. Premium rates for term life insurance will remain the same for 1988. The second type of insurance provided to General Services and Management employees is a self-funded group dental insurance. In 1987, the city contributed $14.00 per month per employee for the total cost of employee (not dependent) coverage. Employees who desire dependent coverage must pay the full cost of such additional premium, which for 1987 was $18.00. Inasmuch as dental insurance is self-funded, the city establishes the dental rates from year to year internally, based upon administrative and benefit pay-out cost data. For 1988, the estimated cost of employee coverage is $14.50. While the city does not contribute to dependent coverage for dental insurannce, for informational purposes, the rate the employee will pay will be increased to $18.75 per month. The third type of insurance coverage available to Management and General Services employees is group health coverage. Employees may select among three optional plans available through the LOGIS Health Insurance Program. The city pays the full individual employee premium per month and provides an additional contribution toward dependent coverage up to a specified maximum insurance premium. The 1987 and 1988 monthly premium costs of the health plans are: 1987 Rate 1988 Rate % Increase • Group Health Plan Individual $ 69.65 $ 75.95 9.0% Family 186.70 204.65 9.6% . MedCenters Health Plan Individual 73.35 78.40 6.9% Family 196.70 233.55 18.7% Physicians Health Plan Individual 104.55 104.55 0% Family 221.62 221.62 0% In 1987, the city contributed up to a maximum of $150.00 per month per employee for employee and dependent coverage for eligible General Services and Management employees. In 1988, the city contribution for Management and General Services employees would be increased by $10.00, to $160.00. This would help offset increases in two of the plans. The fourth type of insurance provided to General Services and Management employees is disability insurance. Short-term disability insurance is self-funded out of the current operating budget, similar to the manner in which sick leave costs are covered. Long-term disability insurance (LTD) is provided through a group LTD policy secured by the city. Currently, the city pays a premium rate of 550 per $100 of salary for covered employees. The LTD premium rates will remain the same for 1988. The average monthly premium cost projected for 1988 are $10.01 per month for General Services employees, and $17.51 per month • for Management employees. Recommended Motion: It is recommended that the following actions be taken with respect to the city's insurance contributions for Management and General Services employees: A. Life Insurance That the city contribution rate remain at $1.80 per month per employee for 1988. B. Dental Insurance That the per employee per month contribution be increased from $14.00 to $14.50. As in the past, employees who desire dependent coverage would pay the full cost of such additional premium. C. Long-Term Disability Insurance That there be no increase in the long-term disability coverage and the city contribution rate remain the same at $.55 per $100 of salary. D. Group Health Insurance That the city contribution be increased from a maximum of $150.00 per month to $160.00 per month per employee • for dependent coverage. • Basis of Recommendation: 1. To provide adequate insurance protection for the Management and General Services employee groups, which are comparable to other city employee groups, as well as employees performing similar jobs in comparable communities. 2. The 1988 budget includes the funding necessary to provide for premium contribution increases recommended. 3. Premium rates for the term life insurance and the disability insurances have remained the same, thus no increases have been recommended. Additionally, the coverage has been determined to be comparable and adequate for 1988. Alternative Recommendation: 1. The council may take no action to increase the insurance premiums beyond the 1987 funding level. Discussion/Decision Mode: The city should implement the premium increases for coverages by January 1, 1988, the beginning of the new insurance coverage period. 0 JDP/eja cc: Administrative Services Director Personnel Manager Respec fully submitted, James . Prosser City anager 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING CITY'S CONTRIBUTION TOWARD HEALTH, TERM LIFE AND DENTAL INSURANCE PREMIUM FOR GENERAL SERVICES AND MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES WHEREAS, the hospital-medical/surgical group health insurance plan is available from the LOGIS Health Insurance Program for city employees and their families, and ;;? I WHEREAS, a term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan is available from the Hennepin County Cooperative Purchasing Organization for city employees, and WHEREAS, a self-funded group dental insurance plan is available to city employees and their families, and WHEREAS, a group short-term and long-term disability program is available to City Management and General Services employees, and WHEREAS, the city council is required to determine by resolution the city's contribution toward the premium for employee group insurance coverages. • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that commencing January 1, 1988, the city shall contribute a maximum of $160.00 per month toward an employee health insurance premium for all eligible non- unionized employees; in any event said contribution shall not exceed the cost of single coverage for employees selecting that option. The city shall also pay the $14.50 monthly premium for the employee dental insurance plan and the $1.80 monthly premium for the term life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plan for city employees for a total possible maximum insurance premium contribution of $176.30 per month. Such contributions shall be for coverage effective January 1, 1988. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city shall contribute the full cost of long-term disability insurance for the General Services and Management employees' coverage. Such contribution shall be based upon a premium rate of $.55 per $100 of monthly coverage. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city council shall determine the city's contribution toward insurance premiums for all organized employee groups by the adoption of the appropriate resolutions concerning labor contracts with the respective organized employee groups. is • Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 23rd day of November, 1987. 7t?>-V- ?4 John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 345 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Request for authorization to seek bids for a computer hardware maintenance agreement. Background: An ongoing cost of owning any computer system is the overall maintenance of the system. Careful maintenance by competent, trained staff is essential in keeping the equipment in continuous service and in proper working order. The most economical method of securing such maintenance is to contract the service with a qualified firm. The City has contracted with MTI Office Systems during the past two years for hardware maintenance services. The 1986 maintenance contract was awarded to MTI in conjunction with their bid for purchase of the system. Because conversion to the new computer system was still underway, the maintenance contract for 1987 was also awarded to MTI to insure continuity. This year, for the first time, the City is required to employ formal bidding procedures for this service under a new city purchasing ordinance • adopted earlier this year. A typical service agreement provides unlimited service calls and repairs, including replacement of defective components, for the equipment covered under the agreement. A service technician is dispatched to the city building where the equipment is located and it is either repaired on-site or taken to a service center for repair. There are several vendors capable of providing the computer maintenance services the City requires and staff expects to receive three or four competitive bids. The total cost of the contract is anticipated to be between $22,000.00 and $30,000.00. Staff has developed the specifications and Request for Proposals. The following schedule for the bidding process is proposed: 1. Begin distribution of RFP: November 27, 1987 2. Publish notice in the State Register: November 30, 1987 3. Publish notice in the Sun/Current: December 21 1987 4. Bid opening: December 14, 1987 5. Complete staff review of proposals: December 23, 1987 6. Council consideration of contract: December 28, 1987 Recommended Motion: • Authorize staff to seek bids for a computer h ardware mai ntenance agreement based on the specifications develop ed by staff beginning on November 30, 1987, with the bid opening on December 14, 1987, at 10:00 AM in the Council Chambers. Basis for Recommendation: 1. The City's maintenance agreement for computer hardware expires at the end of the current year. 2. A service contract for the maintenance of computer hardware is the most economical method available to the City to insure continuous and proper operation of the computer system. 3. City ordinance requires competitive bidding for service contracts of this type. Alternative Recommendations: 1. The council could choose to purchase the maintenance agreement from Unisys (the manufacturer of most of the equipment owned by the City). Unisys has an ongoing contract with the State of Minnesota from which the City is eligible to make purchases, including service agreements. However, preliminary price surveys by staff indicate that the prices in this state contract are not the lowest available for quality service. 2. The council could choose to obtain computer maintenance on a time and materials basis. This would obligate the City to pay a service person by the hour for time spent repairing our equipment. The going rate for this service appears to be between $55.00 and $90.00 per hour. In addition, the City would be • required to pay for the cost of all parts and materials used for the repairs. Many of the computer system components are costly and many repairs consume several hours. Discussion/Decision Mode: The speci ications for the purchase have just been completed and reviewed by staff. Authorization to proceed with the bidding process is requested at the November 23 council meeting to accommodate the schedule outlined above, and to insure uninterrupted service. Respect ully submitted, Prosser JameIMager City 40 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 344 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of 1988 trash pick-up services at city-owned facilities. Background: Trash pick-up is required at all city facilities on a regular basis. The Community Services Department requested quotations from licensed haulers for trash hauling from all city-owned facilities, excluding the liquor stores, for calendar year 1988. Six quotes were received for monthly and extra trash pick-ups: Vendor Buckingham Disposal, Inc. Expert Disposal, Inc. Quality Waste Control Waste Management Estimated Annual Amount Browning-Ferris Industries of MN, Inc. Red's Rubbish Vendor Expert Disposal, Inc. Expert Disposal, Inc. Buckingham Disposal, Inc. The various sites budget for their portion of the service. Due • to the variety of needs, costs will vary from site to site; i.e., city hall will have more frequent pick-ups than Fire Station #2. Due to seasonal demands, costs may vary from month to month at an individual site; i.e., the golf course has more frequent pick-ups during the golfing season. The following is a generalized comparison of quoted annual costs without regard for the variations indicated above: 1985 1986 1987 1988 $ 9,549.77 9,558.00 11,797.00 11,953.00 14,302.28 20,082.00 Average Monthly Cost 572.50 $752.83 $728.19 Buckingham Disposal (recommended) $795.81 Recommended Motion: Approve a 1988 Master Purchase Order in the estimated sum of $9,549.77 for Buckingham Disposal, Inc. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Buckingham submitted the low quotation, and is a reputable, licensed hauler. 2. Adopted 1988 budgets include funding for this service. Alternative Recommendation: Council could reject all proposals and direct staff to obtain new quotations; however, staff does not believe we could obtain better prices. 0 Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may choose to delay action on this until the December 14 council meeting; however, staff is fully satisfied with the services performed by Buckingham Disposal, Inc. in 1987 and see no need for delay. Respectf lly submitted, Prosser James f?a City g er JDP/eja 0 CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 343 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Award contract to print four 1988 seasonal recreation brochures. Background: On November 9, 1987, in accordance with legal requirements, bids were opened for the printing of the 1988 seasonal recreation brochures. Specifications were distributed to 23 vendors. Five bids were received: Wallace Carlson Co. $29,454.00 Nystrom Publishing Inc. $29,694.00 Western Design & Publishing Inc. $41,309.02 Sexton Printing Inc. $27,310.40 Crosstown Printing Inc. $33,330.00 Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter recreation brochures are distributed to each residence in the city. With the exception of the Summer brochure, the school district participates in the brochures by including recreational programs offered by their Community Education Department and sharing a proportional cost of the publications. With the addition of Woodlake Point and new apartments in the school district, 1,100 additional copies were included in the total number of books to be printed in 1988. The specifications also are written to provide for renewal of the contract in 1989 upon mutual agreement of the city and the contractor. An appropriation of $19,700.00 is in the adopted 1988 Community Services Department administration division operating budget as the city's share of the estimated $29,000 for the four publications. The 1987 contract was with Sexton Printing, Inc. in the amount of $26,434.70. Recommendation: Accept the bid minutes and authorize the award of contract for the 1988 seasonal recreation brochures to Sexton Printing, Inc. in the amount of $27,310.40. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Sexton Printing, Inc. submitted the lowest bid, with unit prices extended, for the 1988 contract. 2. Sexton Printing, Inc. has had the contract for seasonal recreation brochures in previous years and has met contract requirements. 3. There is sufficient funding available for this purchase. Alternative Recommendation: The council may choose to reject all bids and readvertise again. However, this could affect the publishing date for the first brochure in 1988. • Discussion/Decision Mode: The bids received November 9, 1987 are to remain in effect for a period of 30 days. November 23 is the only council meeting to fall within this time period. Should the council not take action on November 23 or decide to readervise, every effort should be made to award a contract prior to January 1, 1988 so necessary paperwork may be processed in a timely manner for issuance of the Spring brochure. Respectfully submitted, Jame . Prosser Cit anager JDP/eja 0 0 11 CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening November 9, 1987 11:00 A.M. Seasonal Community Recreation Brochure Bid No. 87-9 October 28, 1987 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 seasonal community recreational brochure bid no. 87-9, as advertised in the official newspaper on Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk Steve Devich, Administrative Services Director Eileen Anderson, City Manager Representative The following bids were submitted and read aloud: I VENDOR I BID I TOTAL I I SECURITY I I Wallace Carlson Co. I I I Cashiers I I 29,454.00 Minneapolis I Check I Nystrom Publishing Co., Inc. I I I Cashiers I I 29,694.00 i Maple Grove I Check I I I Western Design & Printing Inc. I I I Cashiers I 41,309.02 I Minneapolis I I Check I I I I I I Sexton Printing, Inc. I ( I Bid Security I _ I 27,310.40 St. Paul I Check I Crosstown Printing Inc. I Cashiers I 33,330.00 Bloomington I Check I I The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the November 23, 1987 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. Golf 342 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of fertilizer for Rich Acres Golf Course in 1988. Background: The city council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the city council for consideration. The City of Richfield and other agencies have a joint purchasing agreement with Hennepin County for various merchandise, materials and equipment. One of the items cooperatively bid is fertilizer. Turf Supply Company was the low bidder on nitrogen source 1BDU fertilizers used at Rich Acres Golf Course. There is a discount of eight percent if the order is received prior to December 7, 1987. Turf Supply Company was also low bidder in 1986 and 1987. The adopted 1988 operating budget for the golf course includes $15,000 for purchase of fertilizer. The following information is provided for comparison purposes: • 24-4-12 20-0 -16 Tons Unit Tons Unit Ordered Price Ordered Price Discount 1986 18 698 2 700 9% 1987 18 $698 2 $856 9% 1988 17 $698 3 $848 8% Recommended Motion: Authorize the purchase of two fertilizers to be used in 1988 at Rich Acres Golf Course from Turf Supply Company in the estimated amount of $14,410 less an eight percent discount for receiving the order by December 7, 1987 for a net estimated total purchase price of $13,258. Basis of Recommendation: 1. Turf Supply Company is the lowest responsible bidder. 2. By participating in the joint purchasing agreement, staff believes the best possible price has been obtained. There is the added advantage of discount for early receipt of order. 3. Sufficient funding is available in the adopted 1988 budget. Alternative Recommendation: As our participation in the Hennepin County joint purchasing agreement appears to be working well and as Turf Supply Company, • again the low bidder, provides a quality product and reasonable service for the needs of our golf course, there is no alternative recommendation. -/j/ 4- / Discussion/Decision Mode: If the city council approves the purchase at the November 23 meeting so that an order for direct delivery may be placed by December 7, 1987, the city will realize a discount in the amount of an estimated $1,152. Respect ully submitted, Jam D. Prosser Cit anager JDP/eja C? 0 2_C, CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 341 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Repair of flood damage to prairie at Wood Lake Nature Center. Background: The city council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the city council for consideration. As a result of the July 23/24 flooding, the prairie at Wood Lake Nature Center was extensively damaged. Three nurseries specializing in prairies were sent specifications for replanting prairie areas. Two returned quotations and only one of those could supply the amount of forb (an herb other than grass) seed needed. In addition to prairie forb seed, prairie grass seed and a variety of 4,000 prairie plant seedlings, originating within a 150 mile radius of Richfield, were specified. The total quotation from Prairie Restorations,.Inc., the vendor unable to supply prairie forb seed in the quantity requested, was $6,450. Landscape Alternatives, Inc. quoted $6,475 indicating $1,575 would be due upon acceptance of their proposal, $1,200 due February 1, 1988 as a 50% deposit on the seedlings and the balance of $3,700 due upon completion of the work. When the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) surveyed public areas for flood damage, an estimate of $7,000 was made for repair of the prairie. Under the guidelines, the federal government would pay 75% of the repair cost, the state government 15%, and the city would be responsible for 10% of the repair costs. Recommended Motion: Authorize the purchase of materials and labor for prairie repair at Wood Lake Nature Center per their quotation of October 18, 1987, from Landscape Alternatives, Inc. in the amount of $6,475. Basis of Recommendation: . The prairie at Wood Lake Nature Center was extensively damaged in the July flood, 1987. 2. As the prairie was an integral part and important aspect of the nature center, repair is warranted. 3. Landscape Alternatives, Inc. submitted the lowest quotation meeting specifications for the prairie repair. 4. Because of funding to be provided by the Federal government and the State government, the city's cost to repair the prairie will be minimal. Alternative Recommendation: 1. Do not repair the prairie. However, after many years of time and effort to establish a unique feature, to not repair the prairie would seem a disservice to the people now familiar with this aspect of the nature center and a disservice to the program of the nature center. 2. Request staff obtain additional quotations. It is staff's opinion, however, that contact has already been made with all possible vendors who may be in a position to provide the materials and services necessary to restore the prairie. 3. Accept the quotation submitted by Prairie Restoration, Inc. However, the difference in cost is only $25 and it is the opinion of staff the forb seed is essential to the authenticity of the prairie at Wood Lake Nature Center. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item has been scheduled for the November 23, 1987 city council meeting. It is recommended action be taken at this time to afford ample time for the growth of seedlings prior to their transplant date of mid May, 1988. Respectfu y submitted, James D Prosser City Ma ager JDP/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 340 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Purchase of unleaded gasoline in excess of $5,000. 7 .26- Background: The city council policy resolution on purchasing provides that when the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction exceeds the amount of $5,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the city council for consideration. The City of Richfield participates in joint purchasing with Hennepin County. However, occasionally other vendors can bid below the County price, because prices fluctuate on a day-to-day basis. These prices are generally conditional on immediate delivery. On November 16, 1987, Kelley Fuels delivered 8,000 gallons of unleaded gasoline to the city garage. Recommended Motion: Approve the purchase of 8,000 gallons of unleaded gasoline from Kelley Fuels in the amount of $6,680.00. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The City uses unleaded gasoline for operation of vehicles. 2. The fuel has been delivered. 3. There is sufficient funding available for this purchase. Alternative Recommendation: None. Discussion/Decision Mode: This item is on he consent calendar of the November 23, 1987 city council agenda. As the fuel has already been delivered, it is recommended action be taken at this time to facilitate payment. Respectf ly submitted, Jame . Prosser City anager JDP/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Council Letter No. 339 Agenda November 23, 1987 Issue Statement: Award of Contract for Water Treatment Chemicals for 1988. Background: On Thursday, November 12, 1987, bids were opened in a formal bidding process for water treatment chemicals to be used at the Richfield Water Plant. The minutes from the bid opening are attached for council review. Bids were received on two chemicals: liquid Carbon Dioxide (CO ) and Quick Lime. The following is provided for comparison 3urposes: Quick Lime Carbon Dioxide 1986 62.95/ton --70/ton 1987 $62.95/ton $65/ton 1988 Recommendation $64.45/ton $72/ton Recommended Motion: 1. Award a contract to Cardox, Inc. for an estimated 200 ton of the Liquid Carbon Dioxide in the sum of $14,400. 2. Award a contract to Cutler-Magner for an estimated 1,400 ton of the Quick Lime in the sum of $90,230.00. Basis of Recommendation: 1. These chemicals are used daily in softening water. 2. The 1988 Water Division budget includes $115,000 for lime and $5,000 for carbon dioxide, a combined amount sufficient to afford the costs anticipated for these products. Alternative Recommendation: Council may choose to reject all bids and direct staff to readvertise for bids. However, staff does not believe we can obtain better prices from a reputable manufacturer. Discussion/Decision Mode: Council may delay action on this award to the December 14, 1987 council meeting keeping in mind that the current contracts expire December 31, 1987, and the time needed to prepare and sign contract documents. Respec Mully submitted, James . Prosser City nager JDP/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD Bid Opening November 12, 1987 11:30 A.M. Water Treatment Chemical Bid No. 87-8 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 water treatment chemical bid no. 87-8, as advertised in the official newspaper on October 21, 1987. Present: Thomas Ferber, City Clerk • John Thom, Utility Superintendent Eileen Anderson, City Manager Representative The following bids were submitted and read aloud: VENDOR CJ Liquid Carbonic Glen Ellyn, Illinois Hellers Carbonic W. Inc. Webster City, Iowa Cardox Corp. Willowbrook, Illinois The Western Lime & Cement Co. West Bend, Wisc. Cutler Magner Co. Duluth, MN BID SECURITY None Cashiers Check Bond None Bond TOTAL $24,000 Liq. Carbon Dioxide. 120/ton $21,600 Liq. Carbon Dioxide 108/ton $15,000 Liq. Carbon Dioxide 72/ton $104,300 Quick Lime 74.50/ton $90,230 Quick Lime 64.45/ton The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the November 23, 1987 City Council Meeting. Thomas P. Ferber City Clerk