01-24-83 agenda•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 37
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Resolution Authorizing the Sale and Issuance
of $3,900,000 of Commercial Development
Revenue Bonds for Decotah Properties (Corpor-
ate Travel)
At the July 14, 1980 city council meeting, the city council
held a public hearing and passed a resolution giving preliminary
approval for the issuance of Commercial Development Revenue bonds
for the development of a five story, 61,660 square foot commer-
• vial office building on the vacant site lying adjacent to 76th
Street and I35W.
On November 22, 1982, the city council adopted a resolution
authorizing the issuance of the first portion ($900,000) of the
total of $4,800,000 of Commercial Development Bonds needed to
finance this project. The developers are now requesting that the
city authorize the sale and issuance of the final $3,900,000 of
Commercial Development Bonds for this project.
The attached resolution is a general description of the
transaction that is to occur, and it also approves all the nec-
essary documentation, as well as orders the execution and delivery
of the bonds and related underlying documents. A file copy of all
of the documents to be approved is available at the city hall
offices .
It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached
resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of these bonds.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/ ej a
cc: Community Development Director
City Clerk
•
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO
$3,900,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS
Issuer: City of Richfield, Minnesota
Governing Body : City Counc it
Kind, date, time and place of meeting:
on 1983, at o' clock
Members present:
Members absent
Documents Attached:
Minutes of said meeting (pages):
A regular meeting , held
p,m. , at the City Hall ,
RESOLUTION N0.
•
•
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT TO
FINANCE A PROJECT THEREUNDER, SECURED B Y PAYMENTS TO
BE RECEIVED PURSUANT TO A LEASE, A PLEDGE AND
ASSIGNMENT OF THE CITY'S INTEREST IN THE LEASE AND
PAYMENTS THEREUNDER TO A TRUSTEE, AND A LETTER OF
CREDIT FROM GENERAL ELECTRIC CREDIT CORPORATION IN
FAVOR OF THE TRUSTEE, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
DOCUMENTS
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and
acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the
obligations referred to in the title of this certificate,
certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above,
have been carefully compared with the original records of said
corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been
transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete
transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of
said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all
resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents
approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they
relate to said obligations; and that said 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.
WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer
this day of 1983.
(SEAL) Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk
• Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE
MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT TO
FINANCE A PROJECT THEREUNDER, SECURED BY PAYMENTS TO
BE RECEIVED PURSUANT TO A LEASE, A PLEDGE AND
ASSIGNMENT OF THE CITY'S INTEREST IN THE LEASE AND
PAYMENTS THEREUNDER TO A TRUSTEE, AND A LETTER OF
CREDIT FROM GENERAL ELECTRIC CREDIT CORPORATION IN
FAVOR OF THE TRUSTEE, AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF
DOCUMENTS
BE IT 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 is authorized by
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (the Act), to issue
its revenue bonds and to finance the acquisition of real
• property and the acquisition or construction of buildings and
•improvements on such real property and the installation of
machinery and equipment of any and all kinds and any other
personal properties deemed necessary in connection with a
project, as defined in the Act.
1.02. Proposed Project and Bonds. Representatives of
Dacotah Properties Partnership, a Minnesota general partnership
(the Tenant), have proposed that the City, acting under and
pursuant to the Act, issue and sell its Commercial Development
Revenue Bonds ( Corporate Travel Building Project) , Series A,
dated as of February 1, 1983, in the aggregate principal amount
of $3,900,000 (the Bonds), for the purpose of defraying a
portion of the costs of a Project (the Project) , consisting of
the acquisition of land and construction thereon of an
approximately 61,660 square foot commercial office building.
Pursuant to the proposal , the Project will be leased by the
City to the Tenant and the Tenant will agree to make rental
payments sufficient to pay the principal of, premium, if any,
and interest on the Bonds. The City will assign its interest
in the Lease (as hereinafter defined) to a Trustee (as
hereinafter defined). The City issued on December 22, 1982,
its Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Corporate Travel
Building Project) , Series B, dated as of December 1, 1982, in
the aggregate principal amount of 5900,000 (the Series B Bonds)
to finance a portion of the cost of the Project.
1.03. Prior Approv al. On July 14, 1980, this Council
adopted a resolution giving preliminary approval to the Project
and authorizing preparation of necessary documents.
1.04. Project Cost. The Tenant has advised this
Council, and this Council hereby finds, that the estimated
total costs of the Project at the present time equal
appoximately 55,000,000, a portion of which will be paid by the
Bonds. Pursuant to the Lease, all costs of the Project in
excess of the proceeds of the Bonds and the Series B Bonds
available therefor are required to be paid by the Tenant.
1.05. Documentation. Forms of the following
documents relating to the Project have been prepared and
submitted to this Council and are hereby directed to be filed
with the City Clerk:
(a) a Lease ( the Lease) , to be dated as of
February 1, 1983, proposed to be made and entered into
between the City and the Tenant pursuant to which the City
will lease the Project to the Tenant;
(b) an Indenture of Trust ( the Indenture) , to be
dated as of February I, 1983, proposed to be made and
entered into between the City and First Trust Company of
Saint Paul, as trustee (the Trustee) , creating and
authorizing the issuance of and establishing the terms and
conditions of the Bonds;
(c) an Irrevocable Letter of Credit (the Letter of
Credit) , to be dated as of February 1, 1983, to be given by
General Electric Credit Corporation (GECC) in favor of the
Trustee, authorizing the Trustee to draw upon GECC for sums
sufficient to pay principal of and up to 18 months'
interest on the Bonds when due;
(d) A Disbursing Agreement (the Disbursing
Agreement) , to be dated as of February 1, 1983, among the
City, the Tenant, the Trustee, Northland Mortgage Company,
Title Insurance Company of Minnesota and GECC; and
(e) a Bond Purchase Agreement (the Bond Purchase
Agreement) to be executed by the City, Tenant, GECC and
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. (the Underwriter),
relating to the terms and conditions for the purchase of
the Bonds by the Underwriter .
-2-
Section 2. Findings.
It is hereby found, determined and declared that:
(a} the Project, as defined herein and in the Lease,
constitutes a project authorized by Section 474.02,
Subdivision la of the Act;
(b) the purpose of the Project is and the effect
thereof will be to promote the public welfare by
encouraging and retaining the location, retention and
development of economically sound industry and commerce
within the City so as to prevent, so far as possible, the
emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of
chronic unemployment; by promoting the use of available
resources of the community thereby retaining the benefit of
its existing investment in educational and public service
facilities; by discouraging the movement of talented,
ed ucated personnel of mature age to other areas, thus
preserving the economic and human resources needed as a
base for providing governmental services and facilities;
and by encouraging more intensive development of land in
the City to provide an adequate and better balanced tax
base to finance the increase in the amount and cost of
governmental services;
• (c) the Project is located in the City, at a site
which is readily accessible to employees residing within
the City and the surrounding community;
(d} the Project will add to the tax base of the City
and overlapping taxing j ur isdictions;
(e) the Project has been approved by the Commissioner
of Securities of the State of Minnesota, as tending to
further the purposes and policies o f the Act ;
(f} the basic rent payments contained in the Lease
are fixed, and are required to be revised from time to time
as necessary, so as to produce income and revenue
sufficient to provide for prompt payment of principal of,
premium, if any, and interest on all Bonds issued under the
Indenture when due; and the Lease also provides that the
Tenant is required to pay all expenses of the operation and
maintenance of the Project, including, but without
limitation, adequate insurance thereon and insurance
against all liability for injury to persons or property
arising from the operation thereof, and all taxes levied
upon or with respect to the Proj ect and payable during the
term of the Lease;
-3-
(g) under the provisions of Section 474.10 of the Act
• and as provided in the Lease and Indenture, the Bonds are
not to be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the
City other than the revenue pledged to the payment thereof
and amounts drawn under the Letter of Credit or an
Alternate Credit (as defined in the Lease); no holders of
the Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise
o f the taxing powers o f the City to pay any o f the Bonds or
the interest thereon nor to enforce payment thereof against
any property of the City 'except the Project; the Bonds
shall not constitute a charge, 1 ien or encumbrance, legal
or equitable, upon any property of the City except its
interest in the Lease and the Lease and Project; each Bond
issued under the Indenture shall recite that the Bonds,
including interest thereon, are payable solely from the
revenues pledged to the payment thereof and amounts drawn
under the Letter of Credit or an Alternate Credit; and no
Bond shall constitute a debt of the City within the meaning
of any charter, constitutional or statutory limitation.
Section 3. Authorization and A 'proval of the Project,
Lease, Bond Purchase Agreement, Disbursing Agreement and
Indenture.
The City is hereby authorized to provide for the
• acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project and to
pledg e and assign the revenues therefrom and its interest in
the Proj ect and the Lease , all as provided in the Lease and the
Indenture. The City accepts the conveyance by the Tenant of
the real estate described in the Lease. The forms of the
Lease, the Indenture, the Disbursing Agreement, the Bond
Purchase Agreement and Letter of Credit referred to in Section
1.05 are approved subject to such modifications as are deemed
appropriate and approved by the City Attorney and the Mayor;
approval of the Lease, the Indenture, the Disbursing Agreement,
the Bond Purchase Agreement and the Bonds shall be conclusively
evidenced by execution thereof by the Mayor and City Manager.
The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute the Lease,
the Disbursing Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement and the
Indenture in the name of and on behalf of the City. Copies of
all of the documents shall be delivered as provided therein.
The Mayor and City Manager are also authorized and direc ted to
execute such other instruments as may be required to give
effect to the transactions herein contemplated.
Section 4. Official Statement.
The Bonds will be offered for sale by the Underwriter
to the public by means o f an Official Statement (the Official
Statement) . As of the date of adoption of this resolution, a
•
-4 -
draft of the Official Statement has been prepared and presented
to the Council. The City hereby consents to the distribution
of the draft of the Official Statement to prospective
purchasers of the Bonds. The City has not participated in the
preparation of the Official Statement, has made no independent
investigation with respect to the information contained therein
and assumes no responsibility for the sufficiency, accuracy or
completeness of such information.
Section 5. The Bonds; Terms, Sale, Execution and
E1 ec t ion .
5.01. Authorization. In anticipation of the
collection of revenues of the Project, the City shall proceed
forthwith to issue the Bonds dated as of February 1, 1983, in
the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture, the
Official Statement and this resolution. The Bonds shall be
sold by the City to the Underwriter in accordance with the Bond
Purchase Agreement. The Bonds shall mature February 1, 2013;
shall bear interest during the period February 1, 1983 through
February 1, 1993 at a rate per annum not 'in excess of 12~; and
shall thereafter bear interest for each six month period at a
rate equal to the average of the yields reflected in the Index
of Twenty-Five Revenue Bonds, as published by The Bond Bu er
for the preceding six months; provided that such rate shall not
exceed 20 percent per annum; and provided, further, that in the
. event said Index of Twenty-Five Revenue Bonds is not published
in The Band Buyer at any time after August 1, 1992, the City
will compile or cause to be compiled as of the business day
next preceding an interest payment date a comparable index of
municipal revenue bonds of similar maturities and securities on
which the rate of interest on the Bonds shall be based.
5.02. Execution. The Mayor and 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 , document s and instrument s a s may be appropriate
to effect the transaction herein contemplated. The Trustee is
hereby appointed authenticating agent for the Bonds pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.55, Subdivision 1.
5.03. Modifications, Absence of Officers. The
approval hereby given to the various documents referred to
above includes an approval of such final details therein as may
be necessary and appropriate and such modifications thereto,
deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be necessary
and appropriate and approved by the Mayor and City Attorney
prior to the execution of the documents. The execution of any
•
-5-
instrumen t 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
event of the absence or disability of the Mayor, any of the
documents authorized by this resolution to be executed, may be
executed by the acting Mayor and in the event of the absence or
disability of the City Manager by such officer of the City who,
in the opinion of the City Attorney, may execute such documents.
5.04. Election and Authority Under Code. The City
hereby elects to have Section 103(b}(6)(D) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954, as amended (the Code) , apply to the
Bonds, and the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized and directed
to file evidence of such election with the Internal Revenue
Service and to take such other action as may be necessary to
make such election effective. The Mayor or the City Clerk are
also authorized and directed to execute and file such reports
with the Internal Revenue Service as are required by
Section 103 (L) of the Code to preserve the exemption from
federal income taxation of the interest on the Bonds.
Section 6. Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor
and City Manager and other officers of the City are authorized
and directed to furnish to GECC, the Underwriter, and co-bond
counsel certified copies of all proceedings and records 'of the
City relating to the Bonds, 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, excluding any heretofore
furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to
the truth of all statements contained therein.
Mayo r
Attest:
City Clerk
•
-6 -
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 36
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richf field
Council Members:
Subject: Transitory Ordinance Providing for Certain
Capital Improvements. First Reading.
•
In October, 1982, the city council approved the proposed
1983 budget for various city activities. Included in that
budget was the 1 983 Capital Improvement budget, which includes
several projects which are to be funded by monies fro m the
Special Revenue Fund (liquor profits). The following projects
included in the 1983 Capital budget include financing from
this source:
Respectfully submitted,
•
~~w `~~~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Program Directors
Finance Coordinator
KN/ej a
TRANSITORY ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR
• THE EXPE:~IDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
City of Richfield Does Ordain:
Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary
and expedier_t for the City to expend money from the Special
Revenue Fund for the making of Capital Improvements listed
in Section 2 hereof, for which the city would be authorized
to issue general obligation bonds.
Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of ex-
penditures for such improvements which are authorized to
be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12,
subd. 2 of the City Charter, are as follows:
Energy Improvements $ 45,000
City Garage Improvements 15,000
Penn Avenue Fire Station 71,000
Park Land Acquisition 30,000
Forestry 25,000
Richfield Lake Pathway System 15,000
Memorial Park-Planning 10,000
Ice Arena Improvements 35,000
Total $246,000
r Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be
made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from
time to time by council action.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
day of
John Hamilton Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk
•
~~
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 35
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
~~ ~~ ~~
~~ ;~ ~.
~ ~'~v
1 ~~ ~
%. ~ °~ ~ (i
By resolution, the city council must approve the pur-
chase of merchandise, materials, construction or equipment
when the amount exceeds $2,650. There are four such items
on the January 24, 1983 city council agenda.
Winter Sand
The city anticipates use of approximately 1,000 tons of
sand, mixed with rock salt, for winter ice control. Three
written quotations were received for this product - North-
western Aggregates, Inc. quoted a unit price of $3.87; Hedberg
and Sons quoted a unit price of $3.77; and SA-AG, Inc. quoted
a unit price of $2.88.
It is recommended that the city council authorize a 1983
master purchase order for an estimated 1,000 tons from SA-AG,
Inc., for the $2.88 per unit delivered price, for an estimated
total purchase of $2,880. Funds are provided in the 1983
budget document for this purchase.
Chlorination System
The 1983 adopted budget includes an appropriation for
replacement of 20-year old chlorinators at the water treatment
plant. The system feeds chlorine from storage cylinders to
the water for treatment prior to distribution throughout the
city. The existing system has a variable flow working with
pressure feed, while the new system would be a step feed,
working with a vacuum feed which provides greater control and
easier maintenance. Two written quotations were received for
the equipment of a gas chlorination system. Feed-Rite Controls
Inc. quoted $7,620, and C. Emery Nelson, Inc. quoted $5,620.
It is recommended that the city council authorize the
• equipment purchase from C. Emery Nelson, Inc. in the amount
of $5,620, with the city staff to provide installation.
Council Letter No. 35 -2- January 24, 1983
•
Brochure Printing
Four times a year a brochure is sent to each mailing
address in the community. General information, recreation
program and facility information is the primary information
included in this brochure. Eight printing firms were contacted
to provide quotations for 18,500 copies of approximately 32-36
pages with work to include typesetting, keylining, printing,
binding and delivery to the post office. Spring brochures
are to be completed and delivered to the post office by
March 4, 1983.
Two written and two verbal quotations were receiver? as
follows: Crosstown Printing provided a verbal quotation of
$6,985; Bolger Printing provided a verbal quotation of $6,800;
Sexton Printing, Inc. provided written quotations based on two
brands of paper and two total page counts, with quotations
ranging from a low of $5,997 for 32 pages on Scott Paper, to a
high of $6,610 for 36 pages on Nekoosa Paper. Carolyn Casper
quoted $5,180, plus typesetting and keylining charges of $18-
$24 per page. Assuming a 36 page brochure with a $24 cost
per page, the high quotation from Casper would be $6,044, and
assuming a 32-page brochure with an $18 cost per page, the low
quotation from Casper would be $5,756.
• It is recommended that the city council authorize the
spring 1983 brochure printing and related work be done by
Carolyn Casper for an estimated price of $5,900.
Energy Efficient Doors
Damage to one of the large overhead doors at the Penn Fire
Station has necessitated replacement. The 1983 capital project
for improvements at the Penn Station includes work on making
the doors more energy efficient. Therefore it seems advisable
to take steps to provide all three energy efficient doers at
this time rather than replace the one damaged door now only
to make replacement with energy efficient doors in the very
near future. At the same time, the water plant plans to replace
an existing door with one more energy efficient, the work
scheduled to be done through the operating budget.
Two written quotations were received for four energy
efficient doors. Twin City Garage Door Co quoted $5,602 and
Steel Structures, Inc. quoted $5,150. It is recommended that
the city council authorize the purchase of four energy efficient
doors (3 for the fire station, 1 for the water plant) from Steel
Structures, Inc. in the amount of $5,150.
Respectfully submitted,
• )
~~~ ~ ~~
Karl"~Noi1e ~e~
City Manager
cc: Finance Coordinator
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 34
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to
Bingo and Gambling. First Reading.
The city council requested the city attorney's office
to prepare an amendment to the bingo and gambling ordinance
in light of discussions at the January 10, 1983 city council
meeting.
Council Letter No. 34 -2- January 24, 1983
to tipboard and pull-tab is intended to allow those activi-
ties during designated hours (to be supplied by the city
council) during certain days (can be altered by the council).
This is done because this activity ordinarily does not
require a "gathering" or "session" to play. The games are
based upon unrelated single plays by individuals. Likewise,
the part of a raffle which will necessarily occur on the
licensed premises is the drawing of the winning numbers and
awarding the prizes. This can take only a few minutes and
does not involve any participation by the spectators in
the same sense as bingo. A limitation as to the number of
raffles which can be held in any single year would seem
a more reasona_b1e way to regulate raffles. Again, the number
is left blank in the draft ordinance amendment,
It is recommended that the city council use Alternative
B for adoption of an ordinance amendment and make decisions
concerning the number of occasions for each type of gambling
activity. It is further recommended that the public hearing
be scheduled for the February 14, 1983 city council meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
~~ f~~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/ej a
cc: Police Captain
Acting Director Administrative Services
City Clerk
Alternative A
t~ti?ENDMENT TC CF~?PTER V, PART II,
SECTION 5.19 OF THi ORDIidAiTCE
CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD
City of Rich=field Dces Grdain:
Chapter V, Fart II, Section 5.19 of the Ordinance Code of
the Cit1T of Richfield regulating ar_d licensing certain bingo and
gambling activities is hereby amended in the folloUJing respects:
A. By amending Paragraph (2)(a) cf Subdivision. 9
to read as follcws:
C~
"(a) In the case of bingo, compensation may be paid
to an active member of the organization or its
auxiliary, or the spouse or surviving spouse
of an active member, conducting the bingo occasion.
In the case of bingo only, a person not an active
member of the organization or its auxila.ary, or
the spouse or surviving spouse of an active member
may participate in the conduct of a bingo occasion
by resolution of a majority of the membership
recorded in the approved minutes of the organization.
Non-management assistants who are not active
members of the organization, or the spouse or
surviving spouse of an active member may be hired
to assist members fir. conducting the bingo occasion.
Beginning on August 1, 1982, compensation shall
not exceed $59-86 $20.00 oer bingo occasion."
B. B_y amending Faragraph (.7)(a) of Subdivision 9
thereof to read as follows:
"(7)(a} Total prices from the operation of
paddle wheels, pull-tams and t.pboards
awarded in a single day in which they
are operated shall r.ot e:~ceed $1, 000.00.
Total prizes resulting from any single
spin of a paddle wheel or from a single
seal of a tipboard, each tipbcard limited
to a single seal, or frcm a single pull-tab
shall not exceed $150.00. The total prizes
awarded for paddle wheel, pull-tab and
tipboard by any organization. shall not exceed
~58-~8F $35,000 per crganization for any License
year." ~-
•
• .
C. By amending paragraph (3) of Subdivision 9
thereof to read as f~11o~~~s
"(3) Unless the city council sha11 ee provide
otherwise in the license, r.o more than
~~~ bingo cccasicns Ax and no more
than gambling occasicns each year
and e~* ro gore than =sae bingo occasions
e~ and no more trap gam.~^,li.nq occasions
per week may be conducted by the organization.
~uigc~ yr gambling occasion shall ee~t=pie
~ex_aka.~oc_sloa~i-=~"tli°-ee?4E°iu~~i3e-?eLixs exceed
four hours in length from becrirninQ tc end.
Passed b_r the City Council of the City of Richfield,
`~innesota, this day of 1983.
_ ,
John F:. Hamil.tcn, ~?ayor
i
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh, City Cler,{
.a `
„~ J
M E M G R A N D U M
Date: January 10, 1982
To: Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
From: Ronald J. Richardson
Police Captain
Subject: GAMBLING EVENTS AT VETERANS ORGANIZATIONS
Our Richfield city ordinance allows 104 Bingo and 104 Gambling
events at each veteran's club each year, with additional events
to be held only if the city council approves such events.
AMERICAN LEGION REQUESTS: In 1982, the Legion requested that they
be allowe Bingo events on Mondays and Wednesdays and Pull-tab
events on Thursdays, Fridays and Sundays, plus Pull-tab events
on July 4th and September 6th. This gave them 104 Bingo events
and 158 Pu11-tab events for the year. This allowed the Legion
to conduct such events five (5) nights a week or 260 nights
per year;
Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.
Pull-tab Bingo -0- Bingo Pull-tab Pull-tab -0-
For 1983, the Legion has requested Hingo events on Wednesdays and
Sundays and Pull-tab events on Wednesday, Thursday, Fridays and
a one hour event before Bingo on Sundays;
Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.
Bingo -0- -0- Bingo Pu11-tab Pull-tab -0-
Pull-tab Pull-tab
(1 hr. )
This would allow the Legion 104 Bingo events and 208 Pull-tab events
but would cut these activities to four nights per week or 208 nights
per year.
_-
<.,
•
•
Gambling Event Requests
Page Two
VFW FRED BABCOCK POST .5555/
GAMBLING EVENT REQUESTS
In 1982, the VFW was licensed to conduct 104 Bingo events (Thursdays
and Sundays), and 156 Gambling events (Wednesday, Fridays and Saturdays).
A Gambling event occurred at the VFW on 260 nights of the year;
Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.
Bingo -0- -0- Pull-tab Bingo Pull-tab Pull-tab
For 1982, the VFW has requested to be allowed the 104 Bingo events
(Thursdays and Sundays). This year the VFW has requested they be
licensed for Pull-tab events on Sunday, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday
evenings, plus two additional Tuesdays during each month which would
give them ~'~ Pull-tab events. The total of ~6 Gambling and Bingo
events would be conducted either five or six nights a week, or a total
of 2~4 nights a year;
Sun. Mon. Tues. Wed. Thurs. Fri. Sat.
Bingo -0-
Pull-Tab
2 Pull-tabs Pull-tab Bingo Pull-tab Pull-tab
per mo.
RJR/lje
•
~•v
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 33
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Legislative Policy No. 18~Relating
to Energy Conservation
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD
LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT
NUMBER 18 January 10, 1983
SUBJECT: Energy Conservation
•
The purpose of this statement is to express the support of
the City of Richfield for legislation which would make it
possible to fund an energy conservation program.
Impact of the City of Richfield
The City of Richfield has approximately 10,500 residential
structures. Almost all of these buildings were constructed
when energy was very inexpensive. It has been estimated that
the cost of heating Richfield's single family homes will
increase from $5,500,000 in 1981 to $11,000,000 in 1985 and
over $16,000,000 by 1990. This is current non-inflated dollars.
The number of BTU's of energy purchased by our residents and
not efficiently utilized is incalculable.
Position of the City of Richfield
Legislation must be provided which makes it possible for
Richfield and other cities to offer financial incentives to
their property owners for the purchase of energy conservation
materials and equipment. The City of Richfield recommends the
following:
1. That legislation be adopted which would enable Richfield
to utilize tax-exempt financing for an energy bank program.
2. That State Statute M.S. 579 be amended to more strongly
encourage public utilities to assist municipalities in
administering conservation programs.
3. That a more systematic approach to funding energy conser-
vation programs be explored to eliminate or reduce the need
for cities to obtain special legislation.
RICHFIELD JAYCEES
P. O. Boz 23025
Richfield. Mn. 55423
January 19,1983
us.
y-rc~s
YOUNG MEN OF ACTIO
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
The Richfield Jaycees have a long tradition of community support,as we have been
active in Richfield since 1955. In 1982 Richfield Jaycees were instrumental in
in formulating an idea and pulling together a community group that organized the
REAP82 energy awareness project. We feel that it was our efforts in the REAP82
project that motivated and paved ground for an expanded city supported energy
conservation program.
As young people we are very concerned with the impact of rising fuel prices on
the future of our community. We feel that the objectives of any Richfield energy
conservation program should include sufficient motivation to cause large numbers
of our residents to take energy conservation measures. One such motivation
would be an energy bank program. An energy bank should provide incentive for a •
large number of Richfield residents to take energy conservation measures,
ultimately resulting in dollar resource savings and truly benefiting Richfield.
Therefore, the Richfield Jaycees endorse and support a Richfield energy conservation
program and th.e energy bank concept for promoting energy cost savings to Richfield.
We further back that endorsement with a pledge to offer our volunteer services
to any portion of this project that we can be of assistance on.
Thank You..
Y~}ours Truly, -
/ ~ /"~/:.
l
Douglas 0. Olson, President
Richfield Jaycees
"Service to Humanity is the Best Wor~ of Life"
•
RESOLUTION NO. 13
ENERGY AWARENESS COMMISSION
CITY ENERGY PROJECT rUNDING REQUEST
~iHEREAS, the Energy Awareness Commission has as one of its
objectives to promote energy conservation;
BE IT RESOLVED, therefore, by this Energy Awareness
Commission of Richfield, Minnesota,. as follows:
That adequate funding be made available to support
the goals of a City Energy Project as expressed in
Resolution No. 12.
Passed by the Energy Awareness Commission of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, this 17th day of August, 1982.
J_:n `wilcox , Secretary
Dean Sturgis, Chairman
C7
•
RESOLliTION Vo. i2
ENERGY AWARENESS COMMISSION
CITY ENERGY PROJECT ENDORSEMENT
LdHEREAS, the Energy awareness Commission has as one of
its objectives to promote energy conservation;
BE IT RESOLVED, theref ore, by this Energy Awareness
Commission of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
That the Richfield Energy Awareness Commission endorses
a one year municipal energy program with objectives of
community involvement in conservation and weatherization,
along with the concurrent establishment of an "Energy
Bank" fund
Passed by the Energy Awareness Commission. of the City of •
Richfield, Minnesota, this 17th day of August, 1982.
L
Dean Sturgis, Chairman
Jim wi~~-ox, Secretary
•
:fir. Sid Sanford, an Energy Awareness Commission member,
requested that his statement be noted concerning E.A.C.
resolution Vo. 13:
"I object to the Energy Commission taking any position on
what is clearly an administrative authority not delegated
to the commission by the council."
•
ENERGY AWARENESS COMMISSION
M I N U T E S
TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 1982
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 P.M.
Members Present: Dean Sturgis, Sid Sanford, Dennis Louis, Ted Bergman,
Janet Erickson, Bruce Stone
New Members Present: Chris Gross, Dorothy Hines
City Staff Present: Mike Eastling, John Heddle
Minutes were approved
New Members were introduced
1. Election of Officers
Those elected were: Chairman: Dean Sturgis
Vice Chairman: Bruce Stone
Secretary: Jim Wilcox
2. Resolution No. 10 - Quorum amendment was submitted by •
Dean Sturgis .and passed (See Attached)
3. New Business
A. Mike Eastling of Richfield City Staff reported on the
Minneapolis Neighborhood Energy Workshop Project and
Richfield's plans in this area.
Minneapolis saw a bill enacted through the Minnesota
Legislature to have Minnegasco set up a low cost energy
Bank. This money is a non-taxable municipal bond sold
at below market interest rates to Minneapolis banks. The.
Minneapolis project is turning out about 50 percent of
the residents in each neighborhood to the workshops. They
use block organizers and are offering free materials to
participants. Minnegasco has applied a surcharge of $.50
to each of their customers to help finance their contri-
bution. Minnegasco also helps set up energy audits and
provides the contact to apply for energy bank loans.
Richf field city staff have tentatively budgeted $30,000 for
a one year energy coordination position to organize a
similar project for the City of Richfield.
There were some questions regarding tax free municipal
bonds. Will there be any additional cost to the Richfield •
taxpayers? The answer i.s the Federal Government pays
in lost tax revenue on the tax free bond sale The city
will have some administrative. cost as budgeted for a
-2-
B. Energy Auditing is now being offered by Minnegasco to
Richfield residents for $10. Minnegasco~s cost is about
$120.00
C. Mike Eastling reported on a city staff meeting this week
that outlined their ideas on a Richfield energy conser-
vation program.
1. A general policy would have to be established. The
Richfield Energy Awareness Commission should play a
major role in defining this policy, setting the
direction for the City of Richfield and making recom-
mendation to tine city council.
2. The next planning step would be setting goals.
a. Organizing an energy bank
b. Organizing workshops
c. Providing for audits
The energy bank may require special legislation to get
a municipal tax free bond let to fund the low interest
loans.
3. The third planning step is implementation. This would
require hiring a person for one year at about $30,000
to organize the overall project and work on the funding.
4. The last step is the followup - monitoring the
effectiveness of the program .
D. There was a discussion on recuperative furnaces and
furnace efficiency.
Bruce Stone moved a resolution to support Mike Eastlings
ideas on a city energy project. (Resolution m12).
~Mot~o~.n~carr~ec with attached minority opposition.
~y
F. Jim Wilcox moved the attached resolution (No. 11) supporting
the Richfield Energy Awareness Project 83 - REAP 83.
Motion Carried.
G. Bruce Stone mentioned his concern about school window neat
loss. The school system administration is completely
separate from the City of Richfield .
Meeting Adjourned
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
August 25, 1982
Council Memorandum No. 113
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Comprenhensive Energy Conservation Program
RICHFIELD HOMEOWNER FINANCES TOTAL CITY TAX BILL WITH LOW-
COST ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM! While it is unlikely that local
newspapers will carry this headline. in the near future, it is quite
possible for the average Richf field homeowner to do just that. Re-
cent forecasts have indicated that natural gas costs will double
in the next five years, or possibly even triple by 1990. This
would result in the cost of heating Richfield's single family
homes to increase from $S,SU0,000 in 1981 to $11,000,000 in 1986,
and to over 516,000,000 by 1990. These figures are even more dram-
atic when it is realized that they represent current, not inflated
dollars. These increases, coupled with the lack of a national
energy policy, and the lack of state programs to provide directives
and assistance, indicate that Richfield must act on its own behalf
to protect the welf are of its citizens.
This memo discusses the need Richfield has for a comprehensive
energy conservation program. The program would promote energy
conservation improvements in Richfield and initial program emphasis
would focus on conservation in single family homes. Conservation
in multi-family units and non-residential structures would also be
evaluated. The goal is conservation rather than the utilization
of alternative resources. Conservation education and assistance
would be provided to all interested persons regardless of income
level. The proposed program concepts discussed in this memo have
been considered and endorsed by the Energy Awareness Commission.
The HRA will also have ar, opportunity to discuss its role at the
September 20, 1982 meeting.
The following information provides background on Richfield's
energy policy, describes existing programs that have been avail-
able to residents and property owners, discusses recent relevant
conservation activity within and outside of Richfield, provides
a general program description and recommends implementation of a
comprehensive energy conservation program.
The Energy Problem
The energy problem affects the whole country, but particularly
_ _
' Council Memorandum No. 113 -2-
energy poor northern states, such as rinnesota. Minnesota imports
• almost all of its energy, and the Minnesota climate requires large
amounts of energy for the basic necessity of home heating. A
typical Richfield winter results in 70% of all home energy used
being required for home heating. The balance of home energy usage
is consumed by hot water heating and appliances. In the 1980-81
heating season, a typical Richfield household spent about $550 on
home heating and about $850 on total residential energy use. Be-
cause of the more severe winter in 1981-82, heating costs were higher
than the previous year. The predominant home heating fuel in Rich-
field is natural gas.- Natural gas prices, like all energy costs,.
are rising rapidly. These cost increases will have impact on all
income levels, and. could be devastating to low, moderate, and fixed
income residents unless conservation improvements are made to
their homes. Conservation can provide major reductions in energy
usage and cost for all residents. Minnesota Energy Agency studies
show that effective Iow-cost conservation techniques (caulking,
weatherstripping; turning thermostat down, turning lights off) can
reduce costs by up to 30~ for a typical household. Major weather-
.ization (attic and sidewall insulation, improve furnace and appli-
ance efficiency, effective storm windows), can reduce energy costs
by another 20$ to 25~.
Cost savings could impact citizens in the following way: In
1982, the city share of property tax that an average homeowner paid
was $152. The estimated savings of 30~ to be gained from low cost
weatherization would be $165. Thus, in 1982, the average Richfield
homeowner could pay his or her entire city property tax levy from
the savings realized by low cost conservation measures. Even
greater savings could be realized with major weatherization improve-
ments.
The federal and state governments have been unable to provide
assistance to local municipalities to effectively deal with the
energy problem. They conclude that rising costs will result in
energy conservation, fiowever, this puts the burden of rising energy
costs on the individual homeowner. Therefore, it is essential that
the City of Richfield develop a comprehensive energy program to help
minimize the affects of rising energy costs on its citizens.
The Role of Local Agencies
Other Minnesota cities have recognized that the municipality
must provide the leadership and direction to motivate its citizens
to action. St. Paul has become nationally recognized as a leader
through its development of district hearing, energy audits, energy
awareness campaigns, and its Energy Park. Northern States Power
Company and St. Paul have created a non-profit organization, Energy
Resource Center, which provides conservation information to resi-
dents and loan funds for financing major weatherization improve-
ments. The City of Minneapolis has a program which not only makes
citizens more energy conscious, but also results in citizens per-
forming energy conservation measures. The main components of the
,_ Minneapolis program are:
Council Memorandum No. 113 -3
1. Neighborhood Energy Workshops - to teach residents how
to perform low cost/no cost improvements to their houses
which can dramatically reduce energy consumption. After
participating, residents may receive free weatherization
materials based on their specific needs. 50 percent of
the residents contacted about the program have partici-
pated.
2. Energy audits; through neighborhood energy workshops,
the homeowners can sign up for a free audit, the cost of
which has been reduced by Minnegasco and the City of
Minneapo?.is .
3. An "energy bank"; to provide below market financing to
pay for major weatherization improvements. The financing
was created by special state legislation.
The City of Brooklyn .Center has recently initiated an energy
conservation program.. Special legislation was enacted allowing
the city to create finance methods for making energy improvements
on residential property.
•
The City of Bloomington, through its HRA, has created. an "Action
Plan, 1982". As part of a goal to preserve existing housing stock
they intend to offer a program that would make conservation improve-
ments to 12,000 units by 1986. To initiate a program, the Bloom-
ington HRA is considering pursuing necessary legislation to finance
energy conservation improvements. In that regard, the Richfield
staff has been in contact with their Bloomington counterparts to
discuss energy program concepts that could result in legislation
that would be of benefit to both communities.
Existing Energy Conservation Efforts
kichfield has a history of concern about energy conservation.
On March 13, 1978, the city council established a Citizen's
Energy Awareness Commission. The purpose of the commission is
to advise the city council on matters relating to conserving and
preserving natural energy resources. Specific commission goals
relating to the development of a comprehensive energy conservation
program include:
-to assist in helping the public become more aware of the
reasons and needs to extend and om:~imize energy;
-to aid in the establishment of a comprehensive city-wide
energy reduction program;
-to promote, stimulate, and motivate energy conservation
efforts;
-to help inform and educate the public on energy issues;
-to collect information on energy consumption levels, to
quantify energy conservation efforts, and to appraise en-
ergy reduction results.
The commission has provided recommendations on subjects,
such as street lighting and infrared energy auditing. A compre-
Council Memorandum No. 113 -4-
hensive energy conservation program would meet both city council
and commission goals. The council has also supported energy
conservation through policies adopted in the Comprehensive Plan..
The plan, although oriented to land use issues, also addresses
conservation of resources.
In addition-to commission activities, the city has demonstrated
its commitment to energy conservation through various HRA programs.
The HRA administers grants for home improvements, and works with
local banks by referring applicants for below market interest
rates on home improvement loans. Referrals are also made to the
Hennepin County Weatherization Program, which provides improvements
at no cost to very low income residents. The home improvement
grants have a priority on energy conservation improvements in addi-
tion to repairing or replacing mechanical electrical, plumbing
systems and roofs. Insulation, weatherstripping, caulking, ventil-
ation; furnace replacement, and storm window replacement have assist-
ed low income program participants. However, the grant program
can assist only a small portion of the community and lacks both
financial and staff resources to assist all property owners in the
city.
To attract further attention to the need for energy conserva-
tion improvements, the Richfield Jaycees have organized the Rich-
field Energy Awareness Project (REAP '82). The ~:aycees wish to
develop this project as a means of "establishing a long-term
• commitment to energy conservation in the Richfield community.."
The project, which will last until December, 1952, intends to con-
centrate on energy workshops. The Jaycee's intend to conduct work-
shops this fall that provide no or_.low-cost energy conservation
ideas to Richfield residents.
The Energy Awareness Commission has endorsed the REAP '82 pro-
ject (Resolution No. 11 attached'). Thus, Richf field has benefited
from efforts by the city, the HRA and the Jaycees, but a comprehen-
sive community-wide strategy has yet to be established.
The Proposed Energy Conservation Program
A community wide conservation program for Richfield would be
based on the following criteria:
-extensive involvement of residents and community organiza-
tions
-be simple for residents to use
-reach as many residents as possible
-address the major elements of a comprehensive energy conser-
vation program including: education, changes in lifestyle,
no-cost/low cost improvements; major weatherization (e.g.
insulation and storm windows); and furnace/appliance
efficiency.
. The key to the success of the program is its organization.
__. This includes planning, organizing, financing, staffing, implement-
ing and managing the program. It is estimated that 535,000 would
provide funding for the operation of the program. If the program
Council 1~Iemorandum No . 1 1 3 -5-
were to become a cooperative effort between the cities of Rich-
field and Bloomington, staffing and related administrative costs
could be shared.
Program development responsibilities would include, but would
not be limited to:
-creating the financing mechanism to fund major weatheriza-
tion; .
-determining appropriate energy audit machanisms to use
city-wide for teaching and publicizing energy conservation
concepts;
-drafting the format for presenting energy conservation con-
cepts;
assisting in specific legislation efforts related to financ-
ing weatherization improvements;
-investigating other program aspects the council and the
HRA considers appropriate.
Program implementation responsibilities would ;nclud~, but
would not be limited to:
-developing working relationships with citizen groups, and
volunteer citizens toward implementing a program;
-applying the most appropriate community education mechanism
that could be used city wide.. This would result in the implem-
entation of financing, auditing, publicity, and energy con-
servation concepts that would have been developed;
-monitoring program effectiveness and modifying approaches,
as necessary.
Temporary staff would be hired to perform these responsibil-
ities and would report to the Community Development Department,
working closely with and receiving assistance from the Housing
and Redevelopment and Engineering Division staff. Funding for support
staff would come from the existing department budget.
It is anticipated that the program would have two phases. The
first phase would include development and initial implementation.
The staff has determined that this phase would last one year.
Prior to implementing the program, the roles and working relationship
of temporary and existing staff would be evaluated. It would later
be determined whether ther responsibilities for managing the program
could be assumed by existing staff.
A second phase, which could be considered during the 1984 budget
review process, would be the continued application of the implementa-
tion responsibilities and management of the financing aspects of
the program that would extend beyond the first year. The success of
the program could justify a second phase of perhaps two years dur-
ation.
Recommendation
Energy conservation should be the focus of a comprehensive
Council T•iemorandum No . 1 13 -6-
energy plan because it makes sound economic sense. It is the
lowest cost "energy source" and keeps money in the local economy.
Based on the needs Richfield has for energy conservation in the
existing housing stock, the following recommendations are made:
-that the city council authorize and budget for a compre-
hensive city wide energy conservation program by appropri-
ating $35,000 toward the program to allow for the addition
of temporary staff. (The Energy Awareness Commission re-
quested an appropriation of funds to support this project
in Resolution 13, attached).
-that the city council accept the Energy Awareness Commission's
endorsement of a Comprehensive Energy Program (Resolution 12,
attached);
-that the city council recommend the HRA review and adopt a
similar resolution that would indicate HRA support and a
willingness to assist in administering a program.
-that staff explore developing an energy conservation program
in cooperation with the City of Bloomington;
-that the development of a program require immediate attention,
with staffing to occur by January, 1983.
In summary, the implementation of a Comprehensive Energy Con-
i servation Program•such as the one outlined above can yield dramatic
savings in the cost of energy for the entire community at a very
reasonable cost. For an expenditure of 95~ per person, Richfield
residents can save $10 - $15 million dollars during this decade.
Respectfully submitted,
_ ~~ .
rl ~Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Administrative Services Director
Community Development Director
Community Services Director
Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator
Finance Coordinator
•
RESOLCTIOV VC. 11
ENERGY aNanENESS CCMM?'SSICv
ENDORSE.`~E:1T OF REAP ~ 82
:~HEREaS, the energy awareness Commission. has as one of its
ob~ectyves to a~cmote energyr conservation;
;vrERE~?S the avera a Ric. =; ~ ~ i ; „
4 h____d hcme s ag_ g and tese homes
are ~n need or energy conservation improvement and :nary R d
c:.Lyzens are on fixed incomes; ichfiel
3E I:' RESOLVED, therefore, by t.`~is Energy awareness Commission
of Richfield, :~innesota as `ollows:
:'hat the Richfield Energy awareness Commission supports the
Richfield Energy awareness °roject ' d2 (REaP) , a project organized
:.y a cross section of Richfield citizens and a project that
promotes low cost/no cost energy conservation techniques that all
Richfield citizens could utilize.
• ~3532d Dy the Energv ~warene
~+ _~ ss Commission c= the City of
Ric.l i~_d, '~innesota, this 17th day of august, 1982.
Dean Sturgis , C;zai_;nar.
~_~ __ccx, Sec=erar•;
RESCL~TIO~; Vo. 12
ENERGY ~Wr1RENESS CCMM_TSS1C~1
CITY ENERGY PROJECT NDCRSEMENT
"'~ERE~1S, t::e Energy :awareness Commission has as one of
_ts obect~ves to promote energy conservation;
3E iT RESOLVED, there=ore, by this Energy awareness
Commission of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows•
That the Rich=field Energy awareness Commission endorses
a one year municipal energy program with objectives of
community involvement in conservation and weatherization,
along with the concurrent establishment of an "Energy
. Bank" fund
°assed by the :?nergy awareness Commission of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, this 17th day of august, 1982.
Dean Sturg:.s , Cha=r~nan
°L3r V
•
.,.., .
RESOLL'T~0[V :~10 , 1~
EvEEGY ~W~REVESS Cvi~IMDSSIvV
CITY'EVERGY PROJECT rL'NDIVG REQCEST
`,1HERE:;S, the Energy Awareness Commission has as or.e of is
objectives to promote energy conservation;
3E IT RESOLVED, therefore, by this Energy Awareness
Ccmmission of Richfield, Minnesota, as fellows:
That adequate funding be ~~ade available to support
the goals of a City Energy Project as exaressed in
Resolution `10. 12.
• Passed by the Energy Awareness Commission of the City of
Richfield, ~linnescta, this 17th day of August, 1982.
Dean Sturg~.s , Chairman
:.~ ~~ilcox , Sec. eL3rV
•
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, b1INNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 32
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Definition
of Work Group. Second Reading.
C~
At the January 10, 1983 city council meeting, the city
council gave first reading approval to an ordinance amendment
which would clarify the definition of work croup relating to the
personnel ordinance, and scheduled the public hearing and second
reading for the January 24, 1983 city council meeting.
Clarification of the definition of work group is necessary
because work group is defined differently in Section 2.29
Subdivision 40, than in Section 2.31, subdivision 4. Section
2.31, subdivision 4, definition of work group was to have been
eliminated when the personnel ordinance was recently recodif-
ied. However, this clarification was inadvertently omitted.
The proposed ordinance amen
lish a clear definition of work
ordinance as was intended by the
the proposed ordinance amendment
letter.
roue for the entire personnel
recodification. A copy of
is attached. to this council
Respectfully submitted,
k~~~~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Personnel Manager
KN/eja
• AMED?DNIENT TO SECTION 2.31 OF
THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Section 2.31 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield
relating to selection, appointments and probationary period of
certain city employees is hereby amended in the following respects:
A. Subdivision 4 hereof is amended to read:
"Appointment and Placement of Relatives. Relatives closer
than second cousins by blood or by marriage will not be employed
in the same work group {~e~~a}}y-a-~ae~3~-g~e~p-6ai}}-be-de€i~ed-ae-a
c}i~is}er~~; provided, however, that spouses may be employed in the
same work group, so long as no employee will be placed in a work
group in which a spouse will exercise supervision over the employee.
All decisions on the specific determination of what may constitute
a work group and/or supervisor-spouse relationship shall be made
by ,the city manager."
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
r:
day of
1983.
John Hamilton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia Bergh, City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 31
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richf field
Council Members:
Subject: Advisory Commission Appointments
Appointments to the various city advisory commissions
have been scheduled for the January 24, 1983 city council meet-
ing. Copies of applications have been forwarded to council
members previously. The appointments are as follows:
Advisory Board cf Health
There are six appointments to be made to this commission.
Three incumbents, Marian Boehnke, Sharon Thomas and Charlotte
Anderson wish to be considered for reappointment. Robert
Dietl and Lorita Wenzlaff have also applied for appointment
to this commission.
Civil Service Commission
One appointment for a three-year term to be made. The in-
cumbent, Dominic Zappia, who has served one terms, wishes to be
considered for reappointment. Applications have also been re-
ceived from George Evans, Barry Bloomgren and Paul Kaiser. For
the information of the city council, Mr. Evans is also an appointed
member of the Advisory Energy Awareness Commission.
Community Services Commission
Three appointments for three-year terms are to be made.
Two incumbents, Rodell Kopesky and David Giese wish to be con-
sidered for reappointment. Other applicants are Don Anderson,
Barry Bloomgren, Theresa Kassa and Barney Schlender.
Energy Awareness Commission
There are three vacancies on this commission, and only
• one applicant, Wesley Wherland.
Council Letter No. 31 -2- January 24, 1983
Planning Commission
•
Four appointments are to be made to this commission. Two
of the incumbents, Barbara Kritzman and Charles Kauth were
appointed to unexpired terms in 1982 and have served only a
few months. Both of these persons wishes to be considered for
reappointment. Other applicants are Barry Bloomgren, Rosalie
Bjorkman, Richard Holt, Robert Jensen, Paul Kaiser, Theresa
Kassa, Steven Quam, Ken Savageau and Barney Schlender.
Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission
There are three appointments to be made. One incumbent,
John Chell, wishes to be considered for reappointment. Other
applicants are Richard Holt and Barbara Kmetz.
Attached to this council letter is a city council/commission
roster, and a list of the various appointments to be made, as
well as the applicants for those commission appointments.
Respectfully submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
•
_dvisory Board of Health Appointed.. ~~ Term Expires
:Marian Boehnke*"~-----y1 ._ January, 1985
ti..- Sharon Thomas *=--
/Charlotte Anderson* `~'~2. January, 1985.
Robert Dietl---
iLoritaiiWenzlaff '3. January, 1985
' 4• January, 1985
5. _ January, 1985
~6. _ January, 1984
ivil Service Commission
Dominic Zapp_ia* ~ ..~1 . ~ February, 1 986
Ge~org~eGEvans
Paul Kaiser (2)**
Barry Bloomgren (3)**
Community Services Commission
Rodell Kopesky* 1. ~~ebruary, 1986
• David Giese*
Don Anderson February, 1986
Barney Schlender (2)**
Barry Bloomgren (1) ** -7 3 . _ ~~ebruary, 1 986
Theresa Kassa (2) **.-~
Energy Awareness Commission
Toiesley Wherland----- 1 . ~odLa~•~ l~ G~~T~^'°^" July, 1 984
2• July, 1984
Planning Commission ~' ~ ~ `~ ~ ~~ g~~
Barbara Kritzman*-- ~1. February, 1986
Charles Kauth*~
Richard Holt ,(1) ** >2. February, 1 986
Barney Schlender (1)**
{1)** 3. February, 1986
Barry Bloomgren (2)**
~a° =~~-~~~~~Qii 4• February , 1 9 8 4
Ken Savageau
Steven Quam~
Robert Jensen
• Paul Kaiser (1) **
Appointed
Senior Citizens/Handica ed
John Chell* ~1,
Barbara Kmetz
Richard Holt (2)** ~ 2,
3.
*Incumbent
**Preference of Commission appointment
Term Expires
February, 1986
February, 1986
February, 1.986
•
•
•
CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSIONS
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL.
John Hamilton (1)
Mayor
7220 Harriet Avenue
Donald Hassenstab (1)
7120 Irving Avenue
Martin Kirsch (1 )
6725 Penn Avenue #103
Howard Bunce (2)
7608 Sheridan Avenue
Ivan Ludeman (4)
6304 Harriet Avenue
Donald Priebe (1)
7225 Bloomington Avenue
ADVISORY BOARD
OF HEALTH
Stu Swanson (2)
7101 4th Avenue
David Johnson (2)
2900 W. 71 1/2 Street
Lia OzOls (2)
2012 W. 68th Street
(To be appointed )
(To be appointed)
(To be appointed )
(To be appointed)
(To be appointed)
(To be appointed)
TERM TERM OF
BEGAN OFFICE.
1-82 2 years
1-81 3 years
1-82 3 years
1-80 3 years
1-75 3 years
1-83 3 years
FIRST TERM OF
APPOINTED OFFICE
1980 2 years
1980 2 years
1980 2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
2 years
TERM
EXPIRES
December 31, 1983
December 31, 1983
December 31, 1984
December 31, 1985
December 31, 1985
December 31, 1985
TERM
EXPIRES
January, 1984
January, 1984
January, 1984
January, 1984
January, 1985
January, 1985
January, 1985
January, 1985
January, 1985
-2-
FIRST TERM OF TERM
CHARTER COMMISSION APPOINTED OFFICE EXPIRES
R. A. Gilbertson (1) Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
7537 Dupont Avenue
Suzanne Sandahl (1) Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
7601 Bryant Avenue
Betty Carr (2) May, 1 986 4 years May 28, 1984
6633 Lynwood Blvd.
William Reischel (2) Oct., 1978 4 years March 1, 1984
7701 Upton Avenue
Willard Erlewein (1) Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
7021 12th Avenue
Stephan Gales (1) Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
1725 W. 75th St. #1B
Sister C. LeClair (2) May, 1 986 4 years May 28, 1984
Holy Angels Academy
Gary Muenhuber (1) Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
7638 11th Avenue
Tom Scaglia (1} Oct., 1980 4 years May 28, 1984
6410 Washburn Avenue
Janice L. Cerny (1) April, 1982 4 year s April 6, 1986
7545 Fremont Avenue
George Seltz (2) Oct., 1978 4 years April 6, 1986
6726 Pillsbury Avenue
James Collins (1) April, 1982 4 years April 6, 1986
6737 Clinton Avenue
John Landers, Sr. (2} March, 1978 4 years April 6, 1986
7432 Washburn Avenue
Donna Peterson (2) March, 1978 4 years April 6, 1986
6324 Russell Avenue
Gary Butler (1) April, 1982 4 years April 6, 1986
6620 Lynnwood Blvd.
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Jack. Duich (1) 1981 3 years February , 1984
6821 20th Avenue
George Karnas (1) 1982 3 years February , 1985
2921 Washburn Circle
•
•
•
.(Tm ~ lie appointed) 3 years February, 1 986
-3-
COMMUNITY FIRST TERM TERM
SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTED O F OFFICE EXPIRES
Mark Rundquist (1) 1981 3 years February, 1984
7213 James Avenue
Michael Sandahl (1) 1981 3 years February, 1984
-~ 7601 Bryant Avenue
John Ashland {1) 1981 3 years February, 1984
6607 Knox Avenue
Jay Brown (1) 1981 3 year s February, 1984
6439 Stevens Avenue
Robert Sta (1) 1981 3 years February, 1984
7439 Bloomington Avenue
Dave Dunham (2) 1979 3 years February, 1985
7341 Aldrich Avenue
Ethel Naslund (1) 1982 3 years February, 1985
7114 Logan Avenue
Gene Stelman (1) 1982 3 years February, 1985
7301 Oliver Avenue
• To be appointed 3 years February, 1986
To be appointed 3 years February, 1986
To be appointed 3 years February, 1986
ENERGY AWARENESS
ADVISORY COMMISSION
Herbert Doty (1) 1980 3 years ~'uly, 1983
6308 Stevens Avenue
Dennis Louis (1) 1980 3 years July, 1983
6300 4th Avenue
To be appointed 3 years July, 1984
To be appointed 3 years 'July, 1984
Dean Sturgis (1) 1981 3 years July, 1984
1400 F7. 68th Street-'
• '
• 3 l
Chrysanne Gross
(1
) 1 982 years Ju
y, 1 985
6 6 0 9 Humboldt ?venue
_4_
ENERGY AWARENESS (Contd) FIRST T ERM TERM
ADVISORY COMMISSION APPOINTED OF GFFICE EXPIRES
Dorothy Hines (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
6809 Lyndale Avenue
James Wilcox (1) 198.2 3 years July, 1985
,. 6 8 21 13th Avenue
David Wold (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
6223 Xerxes Avenue
Bruce Stone (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
7235 17th Avenue
Janet Erickson (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
2020 E. 66th Street
George Evans (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
6921 Columbus Avenue
3 years July, 1985
Sid Sanford (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
7000 Portland Avenue
Theodore Bergman (1) 1982 3 years July, 1985
7045 5th Avenue
FOURTH OF
JULY COMMISSION
Ethel Naslund (1) 1983 1 year January, 1984
7114 Logan Avenue
Robert Houlton (1) 1983 1 year January, 1984
7545 10th Avenue
Stu Swanson (1) 1983 1 year January, 1984
7101 14th Avenue
Joe Menning (1) 1983 1 year January,. 1984
6915 Grand. Avenue
George Evans (1) 1983 1 year January, 1984
6921 Columbus Avenue
Tim Lindgren (1) 1983 2 years January, 1985
6612 Knox Avenue
Carol Lindgren (1) 1983 2 years January, 1985
6612 Knox Avenue
•
•
•
-5-
FOURTH OF JULY FIRST TERM OF TERM
• COMMISSION {Con't.) APPOINTED OFFICE EXPIRES
Paul Kaiser (1) 1.983 2 years January, .1985
7233 Sheridan Avenue
..JoAnne Wilmes (1) 1983 2 years January, 1985
6827 16th Avenue
Carole Memmel (1) 1 983 2 years January, 1 985
6507 Humboldt Avenue
Ron Jelmo (1) 1983 2 years January, 1985
7508 Bloomington Avenue
HOUSING & REDEVELOP-
MENT AUTHORITY
Donald Hassenstab (1)
~ 1982 5 years October, 1983
7120
Irving Avenue
Ivan Ludeman (2) 1976 5 years October, 1984
6304 Harriet Avenue
Vern Luettinger (1) 1983 5 years October, 1985
7045 14th Avenue
Joan Helmberger (2) 1980 S years- October, 1986
6914 Park Avenue
Thomas Harms (2) 1980 5 years October, 1987
6400 Morgan Avenue
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Susan Koenig (1) 1982 1 year: May, 1983
6809 Wentworth Avenue
Thomas Johnson (2) 1981 1 year May, 1983
6926 Grand Avenue
Roxanne Farrar (1) 1982 3 years May, ,1983
6614 Emerson Avenue
Robert Houlton (1) 1982 3 years May, 1983
7545 10th Avenue
Thomas Hanson (1) 1982 3 years May, 1984
6809 Queen Avenue
Nancy Lindberg (2) 1980 3 years May, 1984
• 6726 Columbus Avenue
-6-
HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST TERM OF TERM
COMMISSION (Con'td.) ~
APPOINTED
OFFICE
EXPIRES •
Joanne Wilmes (1) 1982 3 years May, 1984
6827 16th Avenue
Ronald McGinnis (1) 1982 3 years May, 1985
7145 18th Avenue
George Soderberg (1) 1982 3 years May, 1985
7314 14th Avenue
Diane Healey (1) 1982 3 years May, 1985
6906 Newton Avenue
PLANNING COMMISSION
Connie Hoverson (1) 1981 3 years January, 1984
7408 13th Avenue
Maggi McDemott-Linstrand (1) 3 years January, 1984
7524 Bryant Avenue 1981
To be appointed 1983 3 years January, 1984
Mark Ahlquist (3) 1976 3 years January, 1985
6449 Lyndale Avenue
..Vern Luettinger (1) 1982 3 years January, 1985
7045 14th Avenue
Allan Anderson (1) 198.2 3 years January, 1985
7333 Garfield Avenue
To be appointed 3 years January, 1986
To be appointed 3 years January, 1986
To be appointed 3 years January, 1986
SENIOR CITIZENS/
HANDICAPPED COMMISSION
Carolyn Dobis (1) 1982 3 years February, 1984
2916 West 711/2 Street
Geraldine Schaefbauer (1) 1981 3 years February, 1984 •
7232 Upton Avenue
-7-
SENIOR CITIZENS/HANDI- FIRST TERM OF
•
CAPPED COMMISSION (Con' t.)APPOINTED OFFICE
Marie Richardson (1) 1982 3 years
7213 2nd Avenue
Frank Anderson (2) 1979 3 years
&901 Oakland Avenue
Dale Rusk (1) 1982 3 years
7301 Portland Avenue
Myrna Hammer (1 ) 1 982 3 years
6900 Grand Avenue
To be appointed 3 years
To be appointed
To be appointed
TERM
EXPIRES
February, 1984
February, 1985
February, 1985
February, 1985
February, 1986
3 years February, 1986
3 years February, 1986
•
M
N
t~ ~
N
a~+
^~ N
~~ G~
._
^~ ~
~~ ~
0 ~
L
0
^~
0
January 24
Council Members:
Rosalie Bjorkman called today
and does not wish to be considered
for appointment for a city
advisory commission. Therefore,
Ms. Bjorkman will not be present
for her scheduled interview.
telephone: 869-7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
•
f
•
J
Council Members --
~,,~ This application was submitted
N
>.~ ~
~ only this afternoon, and it was
~ not possible to arrange an interview
~~ Q with the applicant.
N
~'~'~ ~ I am attaching copies of the
= li
, app
cation for the information
v ~ of the council.
~~ Q
C
Q
~~
~
tC
O
^~ o
U °
telephone: 869-7521 (612)
an equal opportunity employer
Date 1-1~-83
NOTE: PLEASE COi`1PLETE 1'N.BLACK INR OR TYPEWRITE
APPLICATION FOR CIT'_ OF RICHFIELD
ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR COPv1MISSION APPOINTMENT
NAME L,oFStro*~ reanette Elaine
Last :~ first ~ vii~.::.~ie
HOME ADDRESS 7325-5th we. °o. Richfield, *~~. 55423
Street No.
City
Zip Cede
MAILING ADDRESS (if different from home address)
Street No. City Zip Code
PHONE: Home 8~Q_377~ Business
APPOINTMENT PREFERENCE:
Planning Commission Human Rights Commission
Park and Recreation Advisory Comm. Civil Service Commission:
Senior Citizen & Handicapped Advisory Board of Health x
Advisory Commission Other
•
Briefly discuss aspects of your experience ~•~hich you believe qualify you for this
municipal commission/committee and why ;you are interested in serving:
T a~ lifelonc es e of o f 1d and feel that I can he of hel on this
cor.+*nossion by being an interested citizen and caring for the health end well
?~ei.ng of others. I don't have any training in the health field.
CIVIC, PROFESSIONAL AND COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES:
T Qtr.., „F *~.,.,, t*..*,,,. F nr 2tlr'~ 7 a
*-r
~?rden Club of Richfield
NOTE: PLEASE COiPLETE APPLICATION IN EITHER BLACK INR OR ~i'YPEWRITER.
~3
f CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 30
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Arcade
Licensing. Second Reading.
Due to the current popularity of amusement machines, and the
increased requests for information regarding arcade licensing, our
public safety department has reviewed the current arcade licensing
ordinance to determine if the ordinance serves the best interests
of the community, the licensee and the City of Richfield. One
area of concern is that the arcade licensing ordinance does not
clearly prohibit scmeone who would not otherwise qualify as a
license holder, from having a significant financial interest and
gain in the operation of the business through the ownership of the
amusement devices.
At the January 10, 1983 City Council meeting, the City Council
gave first reading approval to an ordinance amendment which would
require that significant information be furnished regarding the
ownership of the amusement devices to aid in the licensing inves-
tigation.
Second reading and the public hearing for this ordinance
amendment has been scheduled for the January 24, 1983 City Council
meeting. It is recommended that the City Council hold the public
hearing and approve the attached ordinance amendment.
Respectfully Submitted,
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Public Safety Director
City Clerk
• KN/lkt
•
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER
V, PART II, SECTIONS
5.17 AND 5.18 OF THE
ORDINANCE CODE OF THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
I. Section 5.17 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield
licensing and regulating arcades is amended in the following
respects:
1. By amending paragraph (3) of Subdivision 3 thereof
to read as follows:
"(3) The name and address of all persons owning or
having an interest in the licensed premises. This
requirement shall include the names and addresses
of the owners of any amusement devices intended
to be used by the applicant in connection with
the licensed activity. In the case of a corporation
the requirements of this Para raph shall includF
• the names and addresses of the officers and direc-
tors of the corporation and all shareholders who
own alone or in conjunction with their spouse or
children more than 10% of the issued shares of
corporate stock. The applicant shall also submit
with the application any leases covering the
premises or the amusement devices."
2. By amending Subdivision 7 thereof by adding the following
new paragraph to read as follows:
"(14) No amusement device may be located in an arcade
if the owner of such device would be ineligible
to obtain an arcade license by virtue of Subdi-
vision 4 of this Section."
II. Section 5.18 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield
licensing and regulating amusement devices is amended by
amending Subdivision 4 thereof to read as follows:
Subdivision 4. Application. Each person desiring a license
shall make writted application and furnish such information as
is required by the City Clerk. If the applicant is not the owner
of the amusement device, the application shall contain the name
•
• and address of the owners of the device and shall also contain
a copy of any lease or other agreement between the applicant and
owner relating to use of the device."
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
this day of 1983.
John Hamilton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk
•
•
~k. 8
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINDIESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 29
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Funding for Richfield Fun Club
In May, 1982, the city council approved the Year VIII CDBG
The proposed change in use of the CDBG funds has been review-
ed by Hennepin County and they have determined that the new use
would be consistent with federal guidelines.
Council Letter No. 29 -2- January 24, 1983
It is our understanding that the Minneapolis Day Care Assoc-
iation will be requesting an expansion of the program next year.
The need for subsidized day care is far greater than for just
four recipients, four is just the tip of the iceberg. The future
impact of the action must be weighed heavily by the city council.
cc: Community Development Director
KN/eja
•
January 24, 1983
Richfield City Council Presentation
Diedre Jones, Director
Richfield Fun Club
7145 Harriet Avenue
Richfield, Minnesota
1. The original intention of the CDBG money presented to the
Richfield Fun Club was to serve our conununity. It is still
the intention of the Richfield Fun Club to serve our
community.
2. There is still a need for quality child care in our community,
however - there is also a need to assist people with the cost
of child care.
3. The Richfield Fun Club has run at capacity without this program.
The Richfield Fun Club does not receive any direct benefit
from this proposal. It is the intention of this proposal to
help the community by providing aid to help people move
t~ upward in their employment.
4. The proposed Sliding Fee Program is not welfare. Welfare
benefits, which include full medical benefits, encourage
people to stay home i.e. not work. Title XX Subsidy for
thoes who are looking for work or are working is available
to those under 60% of the State Median Income. This proposal
would provide the incentive to those who are working over
60% of the State Income Guidelines. To help those in the low
to moderate income guidelines.
5. The city of Minneapolis now offers this program through their
CDBG funds to the residence of their city.
P~REN~'°S ASSIS~ANOE E~S~O
SLIOI~O ~'EE SCt~LE
8!1/82
FA#~ZIE~ SIZE 2
9,959 - 1(:,459 ~ 48
70,460 - 70,959 87
10, 96p - 11 , 459 115
11,460 - 11,959 149
17,960 - 12,459 198
12,460 - 12,959 222
12,960 - 13,459 246
13,460 - 13,959 270
13,9b0 - 14,459 294
14,460 - 14,959 318
i 4,960 - 15,459 342
15,460 - 15,959 3fs6
15,9b0 16,459 390
16,4b0 - ib,598 397
~'~MTLY SIZE 4
F3~~~ILY SIZE 3
$ 12,302 - 12,802 ~ 49
12,803 7,302 84
13,303 - 73,802 119
13,803 - 14,302 154
14,303 - 14,802 202
14,803 - 15,302 227
15,303 - 15,802 252
15,80.1 ° - 16,302 276
16,303 - 16,802 3i~3
16,803 - 17,302 32c~
17,303 µ 17,802 ,15.E
17, 803 - 18, 302 378
18,303 - 18,802 403
18,803 - 19,302
__ 428
_....___
._ 19~3~3..
.=_ _
~( ~"~8t~_
. 453
_
19,803 - ..
20,302 478
20,303 - 20,802 488
FAf~9IiY SIZE 5
74,645 - 15,145 $ 48
15,146 - 15,645 82
15,b46 - 16,145 116
16,146 - 16,645 149
16,646 - 17,145 798
17,1.46 - 17,645 222
17,646 - 18,145 246
18,146 - 18,645 270
78,646 - 19,145 295
19,146 - 19,645 319
19,646 - 20,145 343
20,146 - 20,645 367
20,64b - 21,145 391
21,146 - 21, 645 415
21,646 - 22,745 440
~2 4 f - 22,645 464
22,646 - 23,745 488
23,146 - 23,645 572
23,646 - 24,145 536
24,746 _ 24,408 549
$ 76,988 - 17,488 ~ 45
77,489 - 77,988 7b
17,989 - 78,488 108
18,4$9 - 78,988 739
78,989 - 79,488 788
19,489 - 19,988 277
79,989 -
20,488 _
23.s
20,489 - 20,988 255
20,989 - 21,488 278
21, 489 - 21, 988 3013
21,989 _ 22,488 32G
22,489 - ,22,9~8.~_~.~
_ ..~__~~45
? gR9 _"~ 23,488
` 3b7
23,489 - 23,988 389
23,989 - 24,488 4'17
24,489 - 24
,988 4~a~
24,989 - _
2,488 45c~
25,489 - 25,988 478
25,989 -~ 26,488 501
26,489 - 26,988 523
26,989 - 27,488 545.
27,489 - 27,988 568
27,989 - 28, 313 582
The Sliding Fee Assistance Programs, developed and administered by Greater
'•linneapolis Day Care Association are programs designed to assist parents
•;rith their child care costs so they may work or receive training. Present-
ly •;re are administering ttiro programs for residents of Hennepin County. The
Parents` Assistance Fund Frogram and the State Sliding Fee Program.
Tile parent on our program is required to pay a portion of the child care
posts. This portion is determined by :heir family size and gross family
income. The remaining cost of care is then paid to the provider from cur
fund. Parent r'ees are determined on a per family basis, regardless of the
number of children in care.
Parents can choose any type of licensed or legal child care in Hennepin
County. They are responsible to choose the type of care which ~,~ill be most
appropriate for their children. Child care providers currently include
rar^.ily da;: care homes, large and sr::all centers, nursery schools and latch-
. hey progrcr:~s .
~? STORY
The Farents' Assistance Fund started as a pilot project in ti •" '~'~r;{'
' with ~`~?f Community Development Block Grant Funds from the city of
itinneapolis. The program at that time served 5l families many of ;rhom had
become ineligible for "free" day care from Hennepin County through the
Federal Title XX Program, llithout the Parents' Assistance Fund, these fami-
lies would have had no alternative but to pay the~fuil cost of child care
or terminate their employment or training cr probably go cn PuS:ic zssist-
ance.
i~D;•SIilISTZP,T: ~~'.
ureate•r "•ti nnapol i s Day Care Association administers t:~e S1 i di nc F_e Programs .
u'•iuCA is a private non-profit coordinating agent;: for child care services in
• +.~
Gala Anoarson, Exerative Director Lenman Center • 1006 West lake • Minneapolis, MSinnesota • 61 Z•823-7243
=u ce , :ro '~ ~~~~
~{(!r:uMr
~.JV11V J
`,ennepi n Count;. T;~e 3oard of Oi rec :ors i s made up o ~ parents , chi 1 d cart
prCvi tiers, dgeriC ies Concerned ';~ i th c:ii 1 d care and i nterested CCmmUni tJ
members.
r •
The Sliding gee Programs Committee, a sub-committee o. the G7•?OCA Board,
ma'r.es program pot ici es . The ccrrmi flee revises the sliding fee scales ,
studies pertinent in~Ormati0n regarding policies, and advises the sta~~.
The committee is made up of at least Slc, parent representatives `rom all
areas of Hennepin County and several at-large non-child care representatives.
This agreement made and ent_r°d into by and between.tt~e City of
Richfield, Minnesota herei n after referred to as the ~ tY'
Richfield Fun lub a public service agency, here-
ana
in aster reTerrea to as t e agency
WiTNESS'cTh:
WHEREAS, the City is an authorized subgrantee participant in
the Urban Hennepin County Community Development 81ock Grant program by
virtue of a joint cooperation agreement anedcuted between the City and
Hennepin County pursuant to MSA .71.59,
WHEREAS, the City has allocated Urban Hennepin County Community
Development 81ock Grant funds in program year VIII project number
~~ g , ,for the purpose cf supporting t e child care
program aam~nistered by the Agency,
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and
promises contained in this Agreement, the parties hereto mutually agree
to the following terms and conditions:
I
The City agrees to provide $4 00 0 dollars in Urban Hennepin
County Community Development 8~k Grant funds to the Agency in support
of the child care program.
t
• iI
The Agency agrees to provide the City:
i. Affidavit of Agency service fee schedule.
2. A financial statement for the past full year.
3. A statement of public revenue sources for the period June
1, 1981 through June. 1, 1982.
III
The Agency provides assurance that it will comply with:
1. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1954 ~Pt88-352)
(Nondiscrimination in programs or activities receiving
Federal fi nanci a1 assistance. )
2. Section 1J9 of tre Housing and Community Development Act of
1974 as amended. (Nondiscrimination in any program or
activity subject to provision of the HCDA.)
3. CMS Circular A-iC2 Attachment C, Section 14, paragraph (h)
by assurir:g the grange, federal grantor agency, the Comp-
troller general of the United States or any duly authorized
representative access to all records directly pertinent to
this contract for the purpose of ma!cing audit examinations,
excerpts and transcriptions.
4. OMB Circular A-I02 Attachment C (2), and maintain all
required records for a period of three years after receiv-
ing final payment.
IY
The Agency, prior to financial reimbursement from the City shall provide
the City with:
1. Statement of service provided to client.
2. Individual Cata Confidentiality form
3. Client Income Verification
4. Maintenance Service Plan/Service Evaluation
V
This Agreement is effective as of July 1,
fu1.1 force- and effect until a1T funds made
meet have been expended in accordance with
than July. 1, 1984
IN TESTIMONY ',!HEREOF, the parties
and affixed their seal this day
Upon proper execution,
this Agreement will be
legally valid and binding.
By
Agency
and
Agency
_982, and shall continue in
avai7abie under this agree-
paragraphs I-IY, but no later
hereto have set their hands
of 1982.
city of
State of Minnesota
City of
By
ayor
and
i ty ~ onager
•
C
-~.--
~.Iua.HUUJu_
C~i~i~.+~iJUl~.i~ r'
• 'he Richfield Fun Club ~aas granted 54,000.00 of Community Development
Block Grant funds from the City of Richfield. 4lith these funds the
Richfie~d Finn Club is proposing subsidizing the child care casts of
approximately four children of law income families. The procedure
tia*. will be used to determine these families eligibility will be as
fcliows: The families will fill out an application at the day care
canter. This application will then be forwarded to the Greater Min-
neapolis Cay Care Association. It will then be the association's re-
spcnsibility to collect the necessary income documentation to determine
if :here families` income fall within the Section Eight Income Guide-
lines. These families will be evaluated at least every six months to
insure that they still meet the eligibility criteria. Cnce the eligi-
bility determination has been made the applicant and the Fun Club 4si11
be contacted regarding the results.
Those families that fit within the guidelines will then pay a portion of
the cost of care each month depending on where heir income fails within
the scale. The association will reimburse Richfield Fun Club on a month-
. ly basis the difference between the total cost of~care and the parent
portion. The association will be responsible for collecting all required
reporting data for both the City of Richfield and the day care center.
;,iith tfiis 54,000.00, we are projecting we could subsidize approximately
four child care slots. These are our budget figures:
• Grant Amcunt 54,000.00
Administrative Charge (10~) 400.00
Remaining Funds $3,000.00
2 before and after school slots 535.00 per wk. at 31wks. = 51,085.00
Farent portion 200.00
Subsidised portion 5 885.00
$ 885.00 X 2 slots = S1 ,770.00
2 patch !coy slots
530.00 per wK. at 31 ~;sks.= 5 9"s0.G0
Farent portion 200.00
Subsidized portion 5 730.00
573C.00 X 2 slots = 51,4b0.00
2 5efore £. after schcol slots 51 ,770.00
2 Latch ''<ey slots 1 ,4b0.00
53,20.00
The remaining 5370.00 can be used to subsidize the four slots for a portion
• of a month.
~~nY.C:~ ~ C ,~SJ:S i,n~.l.~. _V ~
..n rr_ ~
SL.OI~;u ~~.. SC~L=
8/1/82
F~1t'ILY SIZE 2
~u~.7u ~.:_ ...
1~
Fr~E9ILY SIZE 3
5 9,959 - iG,459 S 48 5 12,3G2 - 12,8G2 $ 49
10,460 - 10,959 81 12,803 - 13,302 84
i~,950 - 11,459 li5 13,303 - 13,802 119
i1,46G - 11,959 149 13,803 - 14,302 154
11,950 - 12,459 198 14,.x03 - 14,802 202
12,.460 - 12,959 222 14,803 - 15,302 227
12,960 - 13,459 246 ~ 15,303 - 15,802 252
13,460 - 13,959 210 15,803 - 16,302 277
i3,96G - 14,459 294 16,303 - 16,802 303
14,46=~ - 14,:59 318 16,303 - 17,302 328
14,96) - 15,459 342• 17,303 - 17,802 353
15,460 - 15,959 366 17,303 - 18,302 378
15,960 - 16,459 390 18,303 - 18,802 403 ~
~
16,460 - 16,.598 397 18,803 - 19.,302 ~ -~
''
19 30~ - 19,802 453
19,803 - 20,302 478
20,303 - 20,802 488
=A~•tILY SIZE 4 FAt1ILY SIZE 5
• ~.~•=5 - 15,15 5 4a 5 1~ ~ 3
c - 17 =~~ ~ ~5
15,1.46 - 15,6:5 32 17,489 - 17,988 76•
;5,640 - 10,145 Tlo" 17,989 - 18,488 108
16,146 - 16,645 149 18,489 - 18,988
~ 139
'E,6~6 - 17,145 198 18,989 - 19,4E8 138
17,146 - 17,645 222 19,489 - .1..9,388 2]1
17,646 - 18,145 246 19,989 - 20,488 233
18,146 - 18,645 270 20,489 - Z0,9aa 255
18,646 - i9 ,145 295 20,989 - 21,488 278
19,146 - 19,645 319 21,489 - 21,988 300
19,646 - 20,145 343 21,989 - 22,^:~8 ?Z2
?:J ,1=16 - ZG , 645 367 22 , 489 - ~ ~~~ _- %~~"
20,;46
21 ,146 - 21,145
- 21 ,645 391
~~ 5"~"'" ~ 22,989,
Z3, ^89 . - 23,483
- 23,988 357
38'?
21 ''4 - 22,145 ^^-.40 23,989 - 24,438 Oil
2=,146 - 22,045 _ 464 24,489 - 24,988 434
22,546. _ 23,145 488 _ 20,989 ° - %5,488 456
23,116 - ?._,645 512 25,489 - 25,9$8 4?8
23,046 - 24,145 .536 25,989 - 26,488 50'1
24,:46 - 24,403 549 26,439 - 26,988 523
25,989 - 27,x'&3 545
27,489 - 27,988 X63
27,989 - 28,313 582
Ri
,..
u: cc:x:. ti~ ~
S "tom. ~v t"~'~
'
~L m i = u
"%
~9
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 28
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Resolution Approving .Joint Powers Agreement
establishing the Minnesota Police Recruitment
System
•
The SPRS is now proposing to reform the SPRS on a statewide
basis which would be known as the Minnesota Police Recruitment Sys-
tem. The particular changes in the joint powers agreement are as
follows:
Structure of the System (Articles I, II and III)
The first obvious change, of course, is that the new System would be
formed on a statewide basis. Membership would not be limited to sub-
urban, metropolitan communities. Thus, the name change to the Minn-
esota Police Recruitment System (MPRS).
Role of the Board of Directors {Articles IV, V and VI)
Under the proposed agreement a significant amount of authority would
flow through the Board of Directors to the Executive Committee. How-
ever, certain authority could not be delegated by the Board (Section
VI-6), and the flow of authority to the Executive Committee could be
Council Letter No. 28 2 January 24, 1983
restricted or conditioned in any manner which the Board deems appro-
priate. These provisions closely parallel the SPRS Board's emergency
resolution delegating authority to the Executive Committee.
The proposed agreement also compensates for the problems which have
been experienced in holding SPRS Board meetings. The MPRS Board of
Directors would meet on a regular basis only once per year, at which
time they would adopt a budget for the following year, elect the
Executive Committee, and take any other necessary action. A quorem
of the MPRS Board would be the representatives of ten members.
Role of the Executive Committee (Articles VII, VIII and IX)
Under the proposed agreement the Executive Committee would be respon-
sible for day-to-day operations of the MPRS, rather than the Board
of Directors. While a greater amount of authority thus is delegated
the Committee by the Board.
The Executive Committee would be expanded to nine members, who would
reflect the "geographic balance" of the MPRS. Wording also has been
added to the agreement to insure a continuous membership on the Exec-
utive Committee, as this will become critical.
Election of Officers (Article X)
The officers of the MPRS would be the same as for the SPRS, except that
the Executive Committee could appoint a Deputy Secretary-Treasurer.
Under the proposed agreement the Board would elect an Executive Com-
mittee, and the Committee itself then would elect MPRS officers. Pro-
visions also have been made to insure the continuity of officers.
Administrative Provisions (Remaining Articles
There are few changes in remaining sections of the proposed agreement.
Those changes which were made resulted from problems that have occurred
under the present agreement. For example, Section XI-4 provides for
the termination of a member which has not paid an amount due the MPRS,
and Section XIII-1 clarifies how a member may withdraw from the MPRS.
Attached to this council letter is a copy of the joint powers
agreement, and a resolution approving the joint powers agreement. It
is recommended that the City Council approve this resolution establish-
ing the Minnesota Police Recruitment System and authorize the Mayor and
City Manager to execute the agreement.
Respectfully Submitted,
~.Q, N ~~~~ ~'~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Community Development
Director
KN/lkt
RESOLUTION NUMBER
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN
THE MINNESOTA POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is authorized by Minnesota
Statutes 471.59 to enter into joint and cooperative agreements
with other governmental units; and
WHEREAS, the City currently is a member of the Suburban
Police Recruitment System (SPRS), a joint powers organization
formed to recruit candidates for entry-level police positions
in the cooperating governmental units and to assist the coopera-
ting governmental units in evaluating candidates for these posi-
tions; and
WHEREAS, it now has been proposed that the SPRS be reformed
on a statewide basis, and a Joint and Cooperative Agreement accom-
plishing such a reformation has been presented to and reviewed by
this City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Richfield City Council has determined that it will
be advantageous to the City of Richfield to participate in the re-
formed organization;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
• 1. Dissolution of the SPRS hereby is requested, with all assets
of the SPRS to be transferred to the newly-formed Minnesota
Police Recruitment System (MFRS).
2. The Mayor and the City Manager hereby are authorized to
execute, on behalf of the City, the Joint and Cooperative
Agreement which establishes the MFRS and which provides
for City participation therein.
3. Thomas Morgan, Jr. and Karl Nollenberger hereby are
designated as the City's initial Director and Alternate
Director, respectively, in the MFRS.
4. The City Clerk hereby is directed to file a duly executed
copy of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement as provided
therein, together with a certified copy of the Resolution.
Adopted by the City Council this 24th day of January, 1983.
ATTEST:
Mayor, John Hamilton
City Clerk, Sylvia K. Bergh
•
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
MINNESOTA POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM
PREAMBLE. The parties hereto are governmental units of the
State of Minnesota. This agreement is made and entered into pur-
suant to Minnesota Statutes §471.59.
I. General Purpose. The general purpose of this agreement
is to establish and provide the operating framework for a joint
powers organization which will recruit candidates for entry-level.
police positions and other comparable law enforcement positions
for the cooperating governmental units and which will assist the
cooperating governmental units in evaluating candidates for these
positions.
II. Definitions. For the purposes of this Agreement, the
following words and terms shall have the meanings given them herein:
Section 1. Board of Directors; Board - the Board of
Directors of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System.
Section 2. Executive Committee; Committee - the Executive
Committee of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System.
Section. 3. Member - any governmental unit which has entered
into this agreement and which is in compliance with the provi-
sions hereof.
Section 4. Minnesota Police Recruitment System (MPRS) - the
joint powers organization established pursuant to this agreement.
•
III. Membership.
Section 1. Any governmental unit in the State of Minnesota •
which provides police services or other comparable law enforce-
ment services shall be eligible to become a member of the MPRS.
Section 2. Charter members of the MPRS_ shall be those
governmental units which join the organization prior to March 1,
1983, and which at that time are members of the Suburban Police
Recruitment System (SPRS) or have valid contracts for services
with the SPRS.
Section 3. Any governmental unit eligible to become a charter
member of the MPRS may indicate its desire to do so by filing a
duly executed copy of this agreement with the Suburban Police
Recruitment System, 109 South Bushaway Road, Wayzata, MN, 55391.
Said agreement shall be accompanied by a certified copy of a
resolution adopted by the governing body of that governmental
unit authorizing execution of this agreement and designating that
unit's initial Director and Alternate Director. This agreement
shall become effective when it has been duly executed by ten eli-
gible governmental units and when copies of the agreements from
these units have been filed as set forth herein.
Section 4. Governmental units desiring to join the MPRS on
or after March 1, 1983, shall be admitted upon a favorable vote
of the Executive Committee. However, no governmental unit shall
be admitted to membership until the Executive Committee has
determined that such admission would not be likely to result in
impairing the validity of the MPRS evaluation process. The Board
•
-2-
• of Directors and the Executive Committee may impose such other
conditions upon the. admission of members, other than charter mem-
bers, as either deems appropriate.
IV. Board of Directors.
Section 1. The governing body of the MPRS shall be its Board
of Directors. Each MPRS member shall be entitled to appoint one
Director to the Board, who shall have one vote. Each member also
shall be entitled to appoint one Alternate Director to the Board,
who may attend meetings of the Board and who may vote in the
absence of that member's Director.
Section 2. Directors and Alternate Directors shall be
appointed by a resolution of each member's governing. body.
Section 3. The. MPRS shall be notified of the appointment of
a Director or an Alternate Director by the appointing member
filing with the Secretary-Treasurer a copy of the resolution
making the appointment. ,Accompanying this resolution shall be
the mailing address of the person so appointed, to be used by the
Secretary-Treasurer as that person's official address for the
purpose of giving any notice required either by this agreement or
by bylaws of the Board.
Section 4. Directors and Alternate Directors shall be
appointed to serve until their successors are appointed and
qualified.
Section 5. A Director or Alternate Director may be removed
from the Board at any time, with or without cause, by a resolu-
tion of the governing body originally appointing that person to
-3-
the Board. The MPRS shall be notified of 'the removal. of a
Director or Alternate Director by the removing member filing with •
the Secretary-Treasurer a copy of the resolution effecting said
removal.
Section 6. Any vacancy on the Board shall be filled by the
governing body of the member whose position on the Board is
vacant.
Section 7. There shall be no voting by proxy. All votes
must. be cast in person at Board meetings by a member's Director
or Alternate Director.
.Section 8. If at any time a member. is in default on any
agreement with the MPRS or is in arrears on any dues. or charges
of the MPRS, during the existence of such default or arrearage
the voting rights of that member shall. be suspended.
V. Meetings of the Board.
Section 1. The first meeting of the. Board shall be held
during the month of .March, 1983. At this meeting the Board shall
elect its first Executive Committee. Thereafter, a regular
annual meeting of the Board shall be held each year during the
months of August or September to elect a new Executive Committee,
to adopt an annual budget for the following year, and to act upon
any other matters coming before it.
Section 2. A quorum at any meeting of the Board shall be the
Directors. or Alternate Directors of ten (10) MPRS members in
good standing.
•
-4-
.Section 3. At the. first meeting of the Board, or as soon
thereafter as is reasonably .possible, the Board sha11~ adopt
bylaws governing its meetings and procedures. Such bylaws may be
amended from time to time as provided therein. .
Section 4. The specific date, time and location of .annual
and special meetings of the Board shall be determined by the
Executive Committee.
Section 5. Notice of the annual meeting of the Board shall
be mailed to the Directors and Alternate Directors by the
Secretary-Treasurer at least fifteen (15) days in advance of the
meeting, and an .agenda for the meeting shall accompany the
notice. However, business at the Board's annual meeting shall-
not be limited to matters set forth on the agenda.
Section 6. Special meetings of the.Board~shall be called by
the President, by the Executive Committee,• or by the Secretary-
. Treasurer upon the written request of ten Directors. Notice of a
special meeting of the Board shall be mailed to the Directors and
Alternate Directors by the Secretary-Treasurer at least five (5)
days in advance of the .meeting, and an agenda, for the meeting
shall accompany the notice. Business at special meetings of the
Board shall be .limited to matters set forth on the agenda. ',
VL. Powers and Duties of the Board.
Section 1. The Board shall take such action as it deems
necessary and appropriate. to accomplish the general purposes of
the MPRS and to provide the services contemplated herein. Such
-5-
action shall include,. but not be limited to, the establishment
and operation of a cooperative recruitment and placement system •
for entry-level police positions and other comparable law enfor-
.. cement positions and the establishment and operation of uniform
testing and evaluation procedures for these positions. These
activities and any other activities authorized by this agreement
or authorized at an annual or special meeting of the Board may be
undertaken in any one or more of the methods outlined herein.
Section 2. The Board shall have 'full control over. and man-
agement of its affairs, which shall include the powers {a) to
enter into contracts, leases. or similar agreements with others;
(b) to provide for. the" prosecution, defense or other par-
ticipation in actions or proceedings at law in which it may have
an interest; (c) to employ such persons as it deems necessary on
•
a full-time, part-time or consulting basis; (d) to conduct-
research into any police selection matter; (e) to purchase, hold
and dispose of property, both real and personal; and {f) to
contract for .space, commodities or personal services with any
member or group of members.:
Section 3. The Board shall have the authority to establish a
method for sharing operating costs of -the MPRS. This authority
shall include, but not be limited to, the establishment of>mem-°
bership dues and fees, charges for services to members or non-
members, and charges for services to applicants or potential.-
applicants for employment. However, any charges to applicants. or
potential applicants for. employment. shall be limited to the
•
-6-
organization's actual cost of administering and scoring candidate
testing and evaluation procedures.
Section 4. The Board may accept gifts, may apply for and use
grants or loans of money or other property. from the state or
federal governments or from .any other governmental .unit, may
enter into any agreements required in connection therewith, and
may hold, use and dispose of such moneys or property in accor-
dance with .the terms of the gift, grant,. loan or agreement
relating thereto.
Section 5. The Board shall adopt an annual budget for the
MPRS, in accordance with the applicable. provisions of this
agreement . Said budget shall provide the operating framework for
the MPRS each year, and the collection and expenditure of funds
contemplated therein may be conditioned in any such additional
manner as the Board deems appropriate. _____
Section 6. The Board may delegate authority to the Executive
Committee between Board meetings, which may be conditioned in any
such manner as it deems appropriate. However, the Board may not
delegate its authority to increase membership .dues or other
charges to members, to adopt an annual budget, to terminate mem-
bers, to~elect an Executive Committee or to change representation
on the Executive Committee.
Section 7. The Board may restrict any authority otherwise
given to the Executive Committee by this agreement in any such
manner as it deems appropriate. Any such restriction of author-
ity shall be made by a resolution of the Board.
-7-
Section 8. The Board .may exercise such other .powers and
.duties as are incidental to the above powers and duties,. but •
which may be required to implement and carry out this agreement.
UII. Executive Committee.
Section 1. The Board shall have an Executive Committee.con-
sisting of nine directors, who shall be elected at the first
meeting of the Board held during the month of March, 1983.
Thereafter,- the Executive Committee shall be elected by-the Board
on an annual basis at its regular annual meeting.
Section 2. Representation on the Executive Committee shall
provide geographic balance, to the extent reasonably possible,
reflecting the actual membership of the MPRS. Initial represen-
tation on the Executive Committee shall be on the following.
basis:
.From Anoka County - one member
From Dakota County - one member
From Hennepin County - two members
From Ramsey County - one member
From Washington County - one merizber
From Carver. and Scott Counties - one member
From outside the seven-county metropolitan
area - two members
Methods for achieving balanced presentation on the Executive
Committee shall be considered by the Board from time to time, and
such representation may be changed by the Board at any annual or
special meeting.
•
-8-
• Section 3: A vacancy shall occur on the Executive Committee
in the following instances:
(a) Upon the resignation or death of a Committee member; or
(b) In the case of a Committee member who was an employee
of a member governmental unit at the time of his/her
election to, the Committee, upon his/her ceasing to be
an employee of that member.
Upon such an occurrence the Executive Committee shall fill the
vacancy on an interim basis until the next meeting of the Board,
notwithstanding the provisions of Section VI-6 hereof.
VIII. Meetings of the Executive Committee.
Section 1. The Executive Committee shall meet as soon as
reasonably possible following the first meeting of the Board.
Thereafter, it shall meet. as often. as necessary to insure the
continued efficient operation of the MPRS.
Section 2. A quorum at any meeting of the Executive
Committee shall be five Committee members.
Section 3. The Executive Committee may adopt bylaws
governing its own meetings and procedures. Such bylaws, if
adopted, shall be subject to this agreement, to the bylaws of the
Board, and to any applicable resolution or other directive of the
Board.
Section 4. The Executive Committee shall meet at the call of
the President or upon the call of any two other members of the
Committee. The date, time and location of a Committee meeting
• shall be established by the person or persons calling the
-9-
meeting. At least forty-eight. (48) hours advance notice of any •
meeting of the Executive Committee shall be given to all members
of the Committee by said person or persons.
IX. Powers and Duties of the Executive Committee.
Section 1. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for
day-to-day operations of the MPRS. Subject to provisions of the
adopted budget and to any other restrictions placed upon its
authority by the Board, the Executive Committee shall have those
powers given to the Board in Section VI-2 of this agreement.
Section 2. Each year the Executive Committee shall prepare a
proposed budget for the MPRS for the ensuing calendar year, which
shall be submitted to the. Board at least fifteen (15) days in
advance of the Board's annual meeting. The Executive Committee •
shall receive and disburse funds of the MPRS in accordance-with
the final budget. for the organization subsequently adopted by the
Board and in accordance with any other restrictions or directives
of the Board relative thereto. The letting of contracts, the
making of purchases and the disbursement of funds also shall be
made in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §471.59, Subdivision
3, as far as practicable with the methods provided by law for
statutory- cities, and with all applicable bylaws of the MPRS.
Section 3. The Executive Committee shall cause an indepen-
dent audit to be made of the MPRS each year, and it shall make an
annual financial report in writing to MPRS members as soon as
reasonably possible following the end of each year. The books
and records of the MPRS also shall be available and open to exam- •
ination by MPRS members at any reasonable time during the year.
-10-
Section 4. Subject to provisions of the adopted budget and
• to any other restrictions placed upon it by the Board, the
Executive Committee may appoint, fix the conditions of employ-
ment and remove any employee of the MPRS, and it may negotiate
and enter into contracts with consultants and contractors to the
MPRS. The Executive Committee shall direct and supervise the
activities of all employees of the MPRS and of all consultants
and contractors to the MPRS.
Section 5. The Executive Committee shall exercise those
powers and duties which specifically are delegated to it by the
Board, subject to such conditions and restrictions as may be
placed upon it by the Board. The Executive Committee also may
exercise such other powers and duties as are incidental to the
. above powers and duties, which are not otherwise restricted and
which may be required to implement and carry out its respon-
sibilities.
X. Officers.
Section 1. The officers of the MPRS shall consist of a
President, a Vice President and a Secretary-Treasurer, all of
whom shall be elected from the membership of the Executive
Committee. These officers shall be elected by the Committee at
its first meeting following the Board meeting of March, 1983.
Thereafter, they shall be elected by the Committee at its first
meeting following the regular annual meeting of the Board, which
shall occur soon as reasonably possible.
Section 2. Upon the resignation of an officer or upon an
• officer's ceasing to be a member of the Executive Committee, as
-11-
provided in Section VII-3 hereof, a vacancy shall occur in that •
office.. Upon such an occurrence the Committee shall fill the
vacant position at its next meeting.
. Section 3. The President shall preside at all meetings of
the Board and of the Executive Committee. The Vice President
shall act as President in the absence of the President.
Section 4. The Secretary-Treasurer shall be responsible for
keeping a .record .of all proceedings of the Board and of the
Executive Committee, for the custody of all MFRS funds, for the
keeping of all financial records of the MPRS, and for such other
matters as may be delegated to this position by the Board or by
the Committee. The Executive Committee may designate one of its
members as a Deputy Secretary-Treasurer, to serve in the absence
or disability of the Secretary-Treasurer and to assist the •
Secretary-Treasurer in such a manner as it deems appropriate.
Section 5. The President or Vice President and the Secretary-
Treasurer or Deputy Secretary-Treasurer shall sign all vouchers
disbursing funds of the MPRS.
XI. Finance' -' •~-'-L ___
Section 1.
The fiscal year for the MPRS shall be the
calendar year.
Section 2. An annual budget for the MPRS shall be adopted by
the Board at its regular annual meeting, as provided in Section
VI-5 hereof. Notice of the adopted budget shall be mailed
promptly thereafter to the- chief administrative officer of each
member. This budget shall be deemed approved by each member
•
-12-
• unless, prior to December 1st of that year, a member gives writ-
ten notice to the Secretary-Treasurer that it is withdrawing from
the MPRS at the end of the year, in accordance with Section
XIII-1 hereof ..
Section 3. Billings from the MPRS to members shall be due
and payable within thirty (30) days of being rendered. In the
event of a dispute regarding an amount which is due and payable,
a member nevertheless shall make the payment in order to preserve
its membership status., but such payment may be made under protest
and without prejudice. to dispute the bill and to exercise any
remedies available to it.
Section 4. Any member whose bill has not been paid within
sixty (b0) days after a billing shall be in default, and that
• member's voting privileges shall be suspended, as provided in
Section IV-8 hereof. Any member whose bill has not been paid
within one hundred twenty (120) days after a billing may have its
membership in the MPRS terminated by the Board.
XII. Administrator.
Section 1. An administrator of the MPRS may be appointed by
the Board or by the Executive Committee, upon specific authoriza-
tion by the Board. Such an admministrator may be employed on a
full-time, part-time or consulting basis.
Section 2. An administrator, if appointed,-shall have only
those powers and duties which specifically are delegated to
him/her by the Executive Committee. An administrator shall
• report to the Executive Committee, which shall be responsible for
directing and supervising his/her activities.
-13-
XIII. Withdrawal..
•
Section 1. Any member may withdraw from the. MPRS upon thirty
(30) days written notice to the Secretary-Treasurer. Such notice
shall be accompanied by a certified copy of a resolution adopted
by the governing body of that member authorizing its withdrawal
from membership.
Section 2. The withdrawal of a member shall not affect that
member's obligation to pay any fees or charges for which it may
be obligated under this agreement.
XIV. Dissolution.
Section 1. The MPRS may be dissolved by a two-thirds (2/3)
vote of all MPRS members in good standing. Such a dissolution
shall be required when the Secretary-Treasurer has received cer-
tified copies of resolutions adopted by the governing bodies of •
the required number of members requesting dissolution of the
MPRS.
.Section 2. In the event of a dissolution, the Executive
Committee shall determine the measures necessary to effect the
dissolution and shall provide for the taking of such .measures as
promptly as circumstances permit, subject to the provisions of
this agreement.
Section .3. In the event of a dissolution, following the
payment of all outstanding obligations, all assets of the MPRS
shall be distributed among the then existing members in direct
proportion to their cumulative annual membership contributions.
•
-14-
Should such obligations exceed assets of the MPRS, the net defi-
cit of the MPRS shall be charged to and paid by the then existing
members in direct proportion to their cumulative annual mem-
bership contributions.
XV. Duration. This agreement shall continue in effect indef-
finitely, unless terminated in accordance with the terms hereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental unit has
caused this agreement to be executed and delivered on its behalf.
IN THE PRESENCE OF: GOVERNMENTAL UNIT:
C~
By
(Title)
RECEIVED AND FILED
by the MPRS this
day of
19
And
(Title)
-15-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ~ ~~
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 27
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Metropolitan Transit Commission Subregional
Transit Planning Study Implementation
On January 10, 1983 Dorene Roeglin from the Metropolitan Transit
staff outlined the following recommendations concerning the MTC Sub-
regional Transit Planning Study Implementation:
1. Implementation of routes D, E, and F shown on the attached
maps since these routes have the greatest potential for
attracting new ridership. Routes D and E are essentially
replacement routes for the existing route 48 in Bloomington
and route F is a new route providing service between the
airport charter terminal and Southdale along 76th Street in
Richfield.
2. Implementation of all the above service changes at one time
so that the impact of a new system can be fully realized.
3. Marketing efforts should be undertaken aimed specifically at
the new routes and the concept of the new service in general.
This marketing effort should be ongoing throughout the demon-
stration/initial operating period. Existing Subregional ser-
vices should also be included in ary marketing effort under-
taken by the MTC that is route/area specific.
4. Continuation of midday downtown oriented service until such
time that the other services prove wholly viable in relation-
ship to the system as a whole.
5. Implementation of the service changes when MTC finds itself
in a more favorable funding climate. The date of service
implementation is contingent upon future action by MTC.
The Richfield city staff has reviewed the detailed Subregional
transit study and the proposed implementation, and has found that the
implementation of the new route F would be consistent with the compre-
hensive plan public transit policy encouraging the Metropolitan Transit
Commission to approve mass transit service in Richfield, especially
service along the I-494 corridor and along other east/west routes. The
proposed cutback in the m~.dday downto=an oriented service outlined in
the subregional transit study, however, would be inconsistent with the
above described policy in that the level of mass transit service in
Richfield would be diminished instead of improved. The city staff con-
curs with the other recommended implementation actions previously des-
cribed in this letter.
•
Council Letter No. 27 2
January 24, 1983
It is recommended that the City Council indicate to the Metro-
politan Transit Commission that it would support the implementation
of the new route F, but would strongly oppose any cutback in existing
service in Richfield,
Respectfully submitted,
~~~ ~~~~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Community Development
Director
KN/lkt
C
SUB REGIONAL TRANSIT PLANNING STUDY: SUBREGION #3
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The study was initiated in response to the Transportation Policy Plan
developed by the Metropolitan Council. In that plan, it was suggested
that the metropolitan transit system was deficient in that equal emphasis
is not given to trips that remained in the subregion as is given to trips
that were destined to the Metro Centers. The purpose of the study was
to analyze the transit service in Subregion 3, and to recommend a service
plan for the Subregion that would better conform with the Transportation
Policy Plan. ,
RESULTS OF THE STUDY
The study concluded that additional "subregional" services could be
provided if midday service on Routes 5, 18, and 47 was discontinued in
the Subregion, and replaced by new routes oriented towards the Southdale
Major Activity Center. The study also recommended a check-point para-
transit system to serve the Edina portion of the Subregion.
PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS
• Because curtailment of the midday service on Routes 5, 18, and 47 could
prove to be very unpopular with existing users of the services, and
because those who would benefit most from the system (Cities of Richfield
and Bloomington) were unsure of the viability of the proposed service plan,
the Commission authorized an additional analysis of the service plan
recommended for the Richfield and Bloomington portions of the Subregion.
The additional analysis was intended to:
• determine the degree of disenfranchisement
that would result if the service plan were
implemented; and
~ determine more exactly the additional riders
that would be attracted to the new services.
In addition to these objectives, the study was also supposed to re-evaluate
the service plan in terms of costs to the Commission.
RESULTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION ANALYSIS
(Refer to attached memorandum)
MEMORA~iDUM
TO: Richfield City Council
FROM: Dorene Y. Roeglin, Transportation Planner
Metropolitan Transit Commission
DATE: January 10, 1983
SUBJECT: Subregional Transit Planning Study: Subregion 3
On January 11, 1983 the Transit Development Committee of the Metropolitan
Transit Commission, will be discussing the Project Management Board re-
commendation relative to implementation of the service plan set forth in
the Subregional Transit Planning Study: Subregion 3 that was completed in
December of 1981.
The Project Management Board consists of staff representatives of the following
entities:
City of Edina
City of Richfield (Rick Jopke)
City of Bloomington
City of Minneapolis
Transportation Advisory Board
Metropolitan Council
Metropolitan Transit Commission
The PMB recommended that the following elements of the service plan be considered
by the Commission:
• Implementation of Routes D,E and F, shown in the
attachment, since these routes have the greatest
potential for attracting new ridership. (Note:
Routes D and E are essentially replacement routes
for existing Route 48, with additional service pro-
vided east of Cedar).
• Implementation of all of the above service changes
at one time so that the impact of the new system
can be fully realized.
~ Including with the implementation of the new ser-
vices, a marketing effort aimed specifically for
the new routes and the concept of the new service
in general. As shown in the attachment, this
marketing effort should be on-going throughout the
demonstration/initial operating period. If possible,
marketing of existing Subregional services should
b.e included in any marketing effort undertaken by
the MTC that is route/area specific.
• Continuation of the midday downtwon-oriented
service until such time that the other services
prove wholly viable in relationship to the
system as a whole.
• Implementation of the service changes when the
MTC finds itself in a more favorable funding
climate. This leaves the date of service
implementation contingent upon future action
by the Commission.
•
•
A T T A C H M E N T
~ ~~ -1 b ~ "' ~ ~'f
BENNETT, RINGROSE. WOLSFELD, JARVIS, GARDNER
December 30, 1982
T0: Dorene Roeglin
FROM: Susan Roux
PLANNING
TRANSPORTATION
ENGINEERING
ARCHITECTURE
INC. 2829 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SE M4NNEAPOLIS. MN 55414 PHONE 612/379-7878
SUBJECT: Subregion 3 Implementation Analysis
Evaluation of Alternative Scenarios - Revised according to Project
Management Board Meeting 12-17-82
BACKGROUND
The Subregional Transit Planning Study fior Subregion 3, October, 1981, concluded
that the current fixed route transit service within Subregion 3 could be modified
to conform with the Metropo{itan Transportation Policy Plan through an increase
in service to the Southdale Activity Center.
Specifically, parts of Route 4 and 18G were to be adjusted to focus additional
service on Southdale and six new fixed routes were to be added to provide direct
peak and off-peak service from south Richfield and Bloomington to Southdale.
These new routes would, in part, replace existing Route 48 and part of Route 47,
and provide east-west service in the subregion to complement the existing north-
M south service. Midday service on Routes 5, 18 and 47 to the Metro Center was to
be terminated at 66th Street in order to operate the new Subregional routes
without significantly increasing the annual operating subsidy for the system.
Estimates ofi ridership, revenues, and costs of the service plan recommended in
the Subregion 3 Study are presented in this report. In addition, four other
implementation alternatives were developed in order to compare the costs of the
proposed system plan with other options of providing subregional service.
ALTERNATIVE IMPLEMENTATION SCENAR-OS
A detailed discussion of passengers, revenues, bus miles, hours and costs have
been completed for each of the following implementation scenarios:
Scenario A - Service Plan as Proposed in the Subregion 3 Transit Planning
Study.
This alternative will include implementing six new Subregional routes in
Bloomington and Richfield, extending existing Route 18G to Southdale, and
eliminating midday off-peak service to and from the Metro Center on routes
5, 18 and 47.
The extension of Route 4 is not included in this analysis because during the
past year the schedule for Route 4 has been adjusted during the midday to mini-
mize layover time and, therefore the route cannot be conveniently extended to
serve Southdale as originally proposed.
MINNEAPOLIS DENVER CHEYENNE PHOENIX
U
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 2
Scenario B - Implement One Subregional Route on top of the Existing System.
This alternative would maintain the present level of service and add one
subregional route which looked the most promising.
Scenario C - Increase Existing Service to Southdale without Adding "New"
Subregional Routes.
This alternative would consider two levels of increased service on existing
routes to Southdale:
- Peak and oft-peak increases
- Off-peak increases only
1
S~~erario D - Aggressively Market the Existing Service.
This alternative would analyze the ridership levels and the costs required
fio aggressively market the existing service in the subregion.
Scenario E - Implement the Proposed Subregional Service Plan with No Changes
in Existing Service.
•
•
This alternative would evaluate implementing the six new subregional routes
without eliminating midday service to the Metro Center on existing routes.
ESTIMATE OF RIDERSHIP TO BE IMPACTED BY REORIENTATION OF MIDDAY SERVICE
MTC Service Planning and Scheduling data on route productivity and results of
the on-board survey were utilized to estimate the number of present midday
passengers on Routes 5, 18 & 47 who would be lost if the proposed subregional
system were implemented.
ESTIMATE OF RIDERSHIP LOSS
AVERAGE
OFF PEAK MIDDAY ANNUAL MIDDAY
ROUTE LOAD1/ OFF-PEAK2/ OFF-PEAK PASSENGERS3/
5 216 162 49,900
18 290 218 67,140
47 575 431 132,750
249,790 or 250,000
Present passengers who cannot complete
their trip within Subregion 3:4/
200,000
485/ 545 daily passengers
Total Loss (80~-100 0
167,860 or 168,000
368,000 - 418,000 annual passengers
1/ All periods except peak; before 6 AM, 9AP~-3:30Ph~, 6:30 PM to last.
2/ Period from 9:00 AM - 3:30 PM.
3/ Assumes six days per week.
4/ 80~ of the existing passengers.
5/ Assumes removing Route 48 al{ day, 6 days a week.
~S
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 3
RIDERSHIP FORECASTS
Ridership estimates have been forecasted for each of the six new subregional
routes based upon the number of households found along each route. The methodo-
logy used was to base the ridership estimates upon the current number of trips
being generated by a subregional route serving Southdale. Passengers boarding
and departing the bus were counted along Route 48 from 82nd and Lyndale to 86t h
and Cedar for every run on July 28, 1982. This date for the load check was
selected to fall within the seven day period for which the household survey
requested trip data. The ridership on this day is conservatively low for Route
48.
The transit trip rate per household was determined by dividing the number of
total trips counted during the load check by the number of households located in
the one-quarter mile corridor of Route 48.
TRANSIT TRIP RATE PER HOUSEHOLD
Passengers Boarding - 51
Passengers Departing - 54
TOTAL TRIPS - 105
Households along Route 48: 1655
Transit Trip rate 105 - 1655 = .063 trips per household
Households along each route were tabulated from Richfield and Bloomington pro-
• petty maps. Residences in Edina along the proposed routes were not included in
the household totals because the overlapping of existing and proposed bus routes
along the streets bordering Southdale offer several transit route alternatives.
The following table summarizes the ridership forecast for each of the proposed
subregional routes and the extension of Route 18G.
RIDERSHfP ESTIMATES FOR PROPOSED SUBREGIONAL SYSTEM
ROUTE HOUSEHOLD AVERAGE- AVERAGE- AVERAGE- TOTAL ANNUAL-/
WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY PASSENGERS
PASSENGERS PASSENGERS PASSENGERS
"C" 6971 439 307 66 132,110
"D" 4783 301 211 45 90,593
"E" 3414 215 150 32 64,664
"F" 5130 323 226 48 97,176
"M" 5969 376 263 56 113,124
"N" 5227 329 230 49 98,977
SUBTOTAL 596,644
18G5/ 4295 average weekly passengers x 52 weeks 223,340
TOTAL 819,984 or
820,000
1/ Assumes .063 transit trips per household.
2/ Assumes 70~ for Saturday ridership.
3/ Assumes 15~ for Sunday ridership.
4/ Assumes 256 weekdays, 52 Saturdays and 57 Sundays/Holidays annually.
5/ Source: MTC Service Planning
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 4
ESTIMATE OF REVENUE
The following estimate of revenue from the new subregional routes, the revenue
lost from the discontinuation of Routes 5, 18 and 47 and the net revenue gained
is summarized in the following table.
REVENUE ESTIMATE
Total
Annual Peak Hour Off-Peak Annual/
Passengers Passengers Passengers Revenue
subregional System 820,000 350,330 469,670 $ 544,550
Routes 5, 18, 47 & 48 418,000 167,200 250,800 275,880
Net Revenue $ 268,670
1/ Assumes $.75 peak hour fare and $.60 off-p eak fare. Also assumes that the
MTC receives full reimbursem ent for elderl y fares from the State of
Minnesota.
ESTIMATE OF OPERATING COSTS
Operating costs for the proposed system and the reduction of existing midday
. service have been estimated assum ing 1983 MTC e stimated costs of $23.40 per bus
hour plus $1.55 per bus mile.
ANNUAL BUS MILES ON PROPOSED SU BREGIONAL ROUTES
ANNUAL/ ANNUAL?/ ANNUALS/ TUTAL TOTAL4/
ROUND TRIP WKDAY SATURDAY SUN/HOL. ANNUAL ANNUAL
ROUTE MILES MILES MILES MILES ROUTE MILES BUS MILES
"C" 17.5 49280 9110 3990 62380 72,980
"D" 24.2 68150 12580 5520 86250 100,910
"E" 14.6 41110 7590 3330 52030 60,880
"F" 14.8 41680 7700 3370 52750 61,720
"M" 16.5 46460 8580 3760 58800 68,800
"N" 17.2 48440 8940 3920 61300 71,720
18G51 82,160
TOTAL SYSTEM 519,170
1/ 256 weekday x 11 ro und trips per day = 2816 annual weekday trips.
2/ 52 Saturdays x 10 r ound trips per day = 520 annual Saturday trips.
3/ 57 Sundays Holidays x 4 round trips per day = 228 annual Sunday/Holiday trips.
4/ Includes dead head miles @ 17 ~.
5/ Source: MTC Servic e Planning
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Paye 5
ANNUAL BUS HOURS ON PROPOSED SUBREGIONAL SYSTEM
ROUTE BUSES ANNUALI/ ANNUAL2/ ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL
REQUIRED WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUN.-HOL. BUS HOURS
BUS HOURS BUS HOURS BUS HOURS
"C","D","E", 12 36,864 6864 3420 47,148
n Fri ~ nMn ~ nNn
18G 5, 720
~ TOTAL 52,868
Service Time 7 AM-6 PM 8 AM-5 PM 1 PM-5 PM
Headway 60 min. 60 min . 60 min.
1/ 256 Weekdays x 12 hours x 12 buses (two buses/route)
2/ 52 Saturdays x 11 hours x 12 buses ttwo buses/route)
3/ 57 Sun-Holidays x 5 hours x 12 buses (t wo buses/route)
•
OPERATING COST - SUBREGIONAL SYSTEM
The estimated annual operating cost of the proposed subregional routes is the
following:
52,868 Annual Bus Hours @ $23.40/Hour = $1,237,100
519,170 Annual Bus Miles ~ $ 1.55/Mile = $ 804,700
Total Operating Cost $2,041,800
OPERATING COST - EXISTING MIDDAY SERVICE
The estimated operating cost savings of dis continuing midday service on Routes
5, 18 and 47 and replacing Route 48 is the following:
21,180 Annual Bus Hours @ $23.40/Hour = $ 495,612
286,081 Annual Bus Miles ~ $ 1.55/Mile = $ 443,426
Total Operating Cost Saved $ 939,038
•
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 6
ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTATION SCENARIOS
The following discussion describes the anticipated ridership, revenue and
operating costs for each ofi the scenarios for implementation described earlier
in this report. In addition to the operating costs described, any scenario
involving new routes or service changes would also require a marketing campaign
which would increase the cost of implementing the scenario. This initial
marketing cost could range from $20,000 to $100,000 depending upon the campaign
design.
Scenario A - Service Plan as proposed in the Subregion 3 Transit Planning Study.
The implementation ~f six new subregional routes, the removal of midday service
on Routes 5, 18 and 47 in the subregion and the discontinuation ofi Route 48 is
anticipated to result in the following:
Ridership: New System Ridership
Ridership Lost
Net Ridership
Revenue: New System Revenue
Revenue Lost
Net Revenue
Operating Cost: New System Cost
Cost of Service Cutbacks
Net Operating Cost
820,000
418,000
402,000
$ 544,550
275,650
$ 268,900
$2,041,800
939,040
$1,102,760
Net System Subsidy: Net Operating Cost-Net Revenue $ 833,860
Scenario B - Implement One subregional Route on Top of the Existing System.
This alternative would be to select one new subregional route to be implemented
along with the existing service. The following table compares the relative pro-
ductivity of the proposed subregional routes. Note that only Route F provides
service to the airport. If any of the other subregional routes were chosen for
implementation it would be desirable to extend the route to include the airport.
ROUTE TOTAL ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL PASSENGERS
PASSENGERS BUS MILES PER MILE
"C" 132,110 72,980 1.8
"D" 90,600 100,910 0.9
"E"
"F" 64,660
97,180 60,880
61,720 1.1
1.6
"M" 113,120 68,800 1.6
"N" 98,980 71,720 1.4
18G 223,340 82,160 2.7
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 7
U
Routes "C", "D", "E", and "M" duplicate existing subregions{ service found on
Routes 5, 18, 47 and 48. Therefore, proposed Routes "F" and "N" would offer
expanded subregional service under this scenario. For the purpose of comparing
the two routes the following table summarizes the route characteristics if both
routes included service to the airport.
ROUTE ONE-WAY TOTAL ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL PASSENGERS
MILES PASSENGERS BUS MILES PER MILE
"F" 7.4 , 97 , 180
"N" 9.8 98,980
61,720 1.6
81,720 1.2
The comparison of the cost of operating each new route is the following:
ROUTE ANNUAL BUS 1/ ANNUAL BUS TOTAL OPERATING REVENUE. NET
HOURS MILES COST SUBSIDY
• "F" 7,858 61,720 279,540
11N}' 7,858 81,720 310,540
1/ Assumes 2 buses required for each route.
$ 64,140 $215,400
65,330 $245,210
Scenario C - Increase Existing Service to Southdale without Adding "New"
Subregional Routes.
This alternative would be to increase service on an existing route serving the
Southdale area in the subregion. A suitable route fior consideration would be
Route 15 which provides east-west service in the subregion and would facilitate
transfers to and from the many existing north-south routes crossing 66th Street.
Presently Route 15 operates at 15-20 minute headways in the peak hours and 30
minute headways in the off-peak hours. The operating costs and ridership
anticipated if the peak hour headways were reduced to 10 minutes and the off-
peak headways to 15 minutes are the following:
Headways Ridership Operating Cost
Peak Hours 25-40~ 100 increase
10 minutes increase
Off Peak 15-30~ 100w increase
15 minutes increase
',
Dorene Roeglin
December 30, 1982
Page 8
•
The implementation of reduced headways on Route 15 is recommended for the segment
of the route on 66th Street between Southdale Center and Cedar Avenue. Minor
adjustments to north-south route schedules to facilitate transfers, with Route
15 would be required to attract the greatest number of riders. The MTC estima-
tes that the cost of implementing this scenario would be $250,000 additional
subsidy per year.
Scenario D - Aggressively Market the Existing Service.
Many marketing techniques have been used by the MTC and other transit providers
to attempt to increase ridership. Some of these techniques include:
1. Promotional and informational campaigns which include news releases,
informational and promotional advertisements, free bus tickets, house-
to-house distribution of schedules and display advertising.
2. Campaigns or continuing programs
distribution of maps, pamphlets,
services; information booths and
at bus stops.
ofi public information including
and schedules; telephone information
displays; and posting of infiormation
3. Advertising campaigns designed to improve the social acceptance of
riding public transit to raise the level ofi awareness concerning tran-
sit services and to Coster favorable attitudes about the convenience,
comfort and relative cost of using transit.
4. Provision and promotion of multi-trip tickets and passes at or below
equivalent single trip fare, to encourage and facilitate fare pre-
payment and pass distribution through public outlets and employees.~~
An aggressive marketing campaign for the existing services in the subregion
could range from $50,000-$100,000 or greater depending upon the program. Gains
in ridership from marketing campaigns are not well documented for existing
systems. Responses to information campaigns can range from 0-6~, and
successful campaigns result in a long term gain in ridership of 3-4~.~~ To
remain effective, information campaigns should be repeated often, such as every
6-12 months.
Scenario E - Implement the Proposed Subregional Service Plan with No Changes in
Existing Service.
The costs of implementing the proposed system with no changes in the existing
service would result in any increased net cost of $705,590 without the
offsetting cost of cutting back service described in Scenario A. This scenario
assumes that only Routes "F", "N", and the extension of 18G would be implemented
because the other proposed subregional routes overlay existing coverage.
1/ Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, U.S. DOT, July, 1981.
l l 3 i , r ~ z
, ~ t
{ ~~,~ ~, a r.~ _
~ ~~^_ /sue .w`-~. ~~c~~ ~ ~, - ^~~i~:~ ~ U O
° *~ O
ry
~X,: I r ~~ / ~ >. ~< J ~' `yam ~ ~ ~
o
,,~:.x ~ ~ '. t
~ ~ -^ ~.
.r ;
F U ~,{~ >5.,..,r~...{ °3At/ Hlf~~~~.~~~Als~h,~- ~~`~~~ ~ t ~~,/ ~''~~~ -~.~ v ~~ $~.
x~ ~ ti
..r~ " ~~ v
~. ,
. ,., ,. \
~. ; .
_:_.
. ~. .:. ,~ f.. - - ~~
j :...
.~ ~. .Y~ m ~
.':
a nee~.n~o. f>ixu~• - +..r.m-.rvnvnw.v,v ~...v.~~~~..xvwi.rNi ~'~ \ l '~i ~'~: J'
:,H ~"; .:~ y.I c,
.y .:r
~c ~ I~ d-s 4; <`-"
_,~
~ .,
-
b
-~' I~
__s _. - .._ - __,_ ..
-_
.:
."~.~, ,-yam ; ~ ~ ~ ~: w <. `~ ~I _ _ .. ~ ~.~ - _ -
~.
F F Wes. .> .. x: ~ 'k O'r. ~v',t~~r' k ~ S`'~
.~ ~ :r ><
` N ~ ~ ~ "' _. `~ `---~~ alp; \
-.r.cy i..~ - ~ -? a.;rK.w ~._x: Ac b 2ra ..., __ _ _ :,ti}. ` '~~.;
. .
., ~
. ..:
Yn
V - .. ~.
..,~,,.k,,.,. ~,,;~ ::A~~a=gs.~:~~-~a« ~wro~+ws~~;~prs~s~p~~rt~~~I„ , ` V :Q~
~.
~; ~ '
.~ ... ~ .. .,t .~ QA'18 ~~,'~.
~ 371'/.ONtJWtiOt~C:
_.
,,.,. V.. ~ ~... .'.'"' `~..,,... > '_,, r..~.:. -s ~ `yam .. "~~ .k•
` ~,r~,' } ~~ ~ ,; ., ~~I:Y ~. .31 f'", ,~.Y_,n.m.r~.-w ~.,...«r ,x>-ux ...'~} ,,, ~~) x~x .~.. y..-. ~.Ls
.. .._,,., d . ,.: r r, _.
„_., r ~ `.
sZ t~. s~~r f . ' ', y ~ r ~~ /, ~ ~ ~'~' ~
,g d ~ ~ ~~~},~ ~ ~ ~ t ~' ~1 ~ L......~:'~,
~~~g$~ W O
~ ~~ J
j' ;i s' ~ i j f. ~sb~7.~ W tL 5
} ~ '~~,^,,~,~ ~~
~ r ~ a ~f / ~ O ~~,~d. W ~ ~ Q
:, ~ s
V ~ ~ - oa- ~E ;~w ;
~' ,,~ls~~~~ ~ i '. ~ _ Z ~ ° x
O
:~ y
~ a~a ~ ,s ~ ~. M
. J~~ Y /M~/ ~qr ~I fT' { .fie ~.:1+- \
F ~' t. r~..,~~.•:. Z = W •3Ad H1tiZ~~, t , Jh '~"`~ ~ -~-~~~' ,,'~ ~~
~L ' ~ v, k
...
y .. rn ~. ~ ~
__f : -. `.
~~
;.t :i ,• 1
~. ~a ,'
r '.. .. ~:
~ _ s ~~ ~ ;,~} ~~ ~ C;
- ,: ,' ; ~ ~ ,a: ti
' s
~ •.~.v ooc~„ ~ cw w...w~mi+,+.v-nw .w,... , ..w.wrxea-vimvx.~.. ~. ~ 'ti
~. mw v.r~ y \ Jam,
Ham,. ..,.
., a ~ r ~ ~ ~
~~ ~~
.:....
$ h
`}
F:
w
~. .r _.. _ - ~ ~ ...
> ~~; c k~s,:r Via. ~ ^ `<T ~ : , "`i ~, r
.: s
S~ 4 ~~ ~ ~ ,
,,rt <^ t,~ •3Ab XON~ ~ --~,4"~, G '' .~ f ,~ ~,
., ~, ~ _ \.....,r,.~
ii> ' @
,p T ~ _ •~ ;,d~~~ > ~ y >' ~ ~ m'~ 'i' C ~ .ii~iF ~ .. H.lf }f :. S. } ,}t~~t
'A"~c x ~.~ h W -.lY W ....aC. ~. .;W .. [~., ~~ M ~~ '~: ~ DES 'L\Q.
;Xkl3.X k
._
..
_. • ].~ 4,
1
a
~ W `~S - % w ~i
,.
... _., ..,..,~....m...... ~
,"`: < ~ ,~
S
.:„
z ; ~~
w
k k .,
~ ~~~ ,;:
..<
~~ ,
~ ,~
~~t....... ,~~ .
._
.,..~rr.~...... ~•-.... ,,.. .
~ .{; ~ ~'~'~~.p~ ~ '3~ i Y ~ 1 r'~'.a u..v_.ti..«,. x ,._., , v._...x .__.x x...r ~ ~ ~ ~ x_.., . _. ~.. .. x . ~.~'
;mil \~: "~j" ~ .. ~~~ ~. ~ ;..~, c~. ~~~t j.wj
~` ?: : ~ f ~ 1. t 3 :. i%$ - ~ ~ i
~T a ~
\~;/~cc~~ a„
fs ,fie, ~'~ j i 2` ? \'~ ~ ^O
~.
z . ,;, ``~. ~ .~ . l ~
~ ~ $ f ~~,
~ ,~-~ ~ r. *a. 0 FW- IW-
'til I > ~ ~. • ~$- X CC CC N O ,
r 7 v o`~ .~ s~ w ® (fir/J/~l
FFF ~~_x J V ` /,.~ 2 777 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~.' (.
1,h tr ~ - _ A
4~ i Y
S } V."~.
f ~ = 3 1
^ i
jY ~~ ~ ~ a+ ® 1. ,` ..`~~ ~, ` . "',~~*; 'y _~\'
,~ ~ ~
' i~ y\
-,.. 3AV aan~p ~ ,,,, '~~-
,~ ::.
,.,f .4 ~
. ~ { ~
i' -
M ..
....~ O ` > ~ ~ ~ ,,.
~~ ~ ~ i..
,.,v
it - x.n.a,c .J ~
..~
RCi/ .... r 'T"
_ ,
~ ~ ~ s .._y...r..,.,~-:-----.~,.~_.,. Y,~ n .~,~5
.....
T ~fi~ .,,,F ~'J,~f. E"~ .E? ff ® ~~ H -. T' t=, ~ l!
~.
< ;. ":.~ 3
~"
Nt y'
...,gyn.., ~...~ '9£'=;? ~`~~~~~M~i11s~i~ .~ ,vim.--W- ~.r ~ `~ ~'~
,',: fD ~-= ,. .. '3Atl. N7+73d `.~,' ,x~c .. ~` `~ X` kqy . tD .. ~`` s.: ':
~. -'
. 5. „+, ~ ~
r. ;~ , g ~ .; 3 ~ 1 ., ,
l -
M ~ ~ ' 5.,~ ~ ~ Z~~.~ { ~ p `~ . ~'~ N ~,~ ,
t - ~
i
Y
c 1 ~ ~ ~ ,.; ~'"w,
,
` -
. '~, 4 'mm ~ .w .. .
._ .. ~ ,~.~~. y
. ~.£ .,.~nr.,...... '~. ~..... .
~~3~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 26
Agenda January 24, 1983
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Request from Hennepin County to Authorize the
Sale of Tax Forfeited Property in Richfield
Hennepin County has requested approval for the public auction of
tax forfeited property in Richfield for sale to the adjacent owners.
The parcel located on the west side of 35W between 68th and 69th Street
is land-locked, and lies adjacent to three residential properties. The
attached map shows the location of the parcel.
• State statutes require that prior to any disposal of publicly
owned property by any public body, the Planning Commission must find
that the disposal of property is consistent with the city's comprehen-
sive plan. The City Council, by resolution adopted by a 2/3 vote, can
dispense with this requirement when, in its judgment, the proposed dis-
posal of property has no relationship to the comprehensive municipal
plan. The site in question is undevelopable by itself because it is
undersized and does not front or have access to a street. Because the
site is undevelopable, it is the opinion of the city staff that the
proposed disposal of real property has no relationship to the compre-
hensive municipal plan.
It is recommended that the City Council pass the attached resolu-
tion indicating that the Planning Commission review is not required.
It is further recomended that the City Council indicate to Hennepin
County, city approval of the public auction for private sale of the
site in question to adjacent property owners. The council should also
indicate to the county that the proposed site is undevelopable by
itself .
Respectfully submitted,
r
}~a~ ~ a~.~,tiC.~.1~-`
• Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Community Development
Director
KN/lkt
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION FINDING THAT LAi~1D DISPOSITION HAS
• NO RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHE~v'SIVE PLAN
AI~1D AUTHORIZING SAID DISPOSI^1 ION
WHEREAS, L'~Zinnesota State Statutes 462.356 Subdivision 2 requires
the Planning Commission must review all disposition of publicly
owned land by any public body within the city unless the City Council
finds that the proposed disposition of property has no relationship
with the city's comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County has requested that Richfield approve
of its disposition of tax-forfeited land, property identification
number 28-028-24-43-0007, by public auction for public sale to adja-
cent owners; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota
has reviewed the proposed disposition; and
WHEREAS, the parcel in question cannot be developed because of
non-compliance with local ordinances concerning lot size and access
to public streets.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Richfield as follows:
• 1. That the proposed disposition has no relationship to the
comprehensive plan because it cannot be developed except
as part of an adjacent parcel.
2. That the City Council approves of the public auction for
private sale to adjacent owners because the parcel cannot
be improved because of ron-compliance with local ordinances.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this
day of 1983.
John Hamilton, Mavor
ATTEST:
Sylvia R. Bergh, Cit~,r Cierk
_ ~.
~~~
~~~
i/(/I/~ ~ ! i l C ~ T
~//
' a F ~
\
,4 L
\~~. -v
~~G „ CgKE
<~r
:• ~
.
_'~
~~
- ~
i ~ ~ ~ 'L ~
O ;so• ~
'e-,
`
z , ~
t ,jz, _ ~
~~
STREET +~~~oc,~aKE
~~;~a~cs L(,j
~~ ' ~
o /
~~z
~"
~~c ~
`/~
P ~
,Q ~ -2
\~
I
_
v t
;~,z ..
,,;,~ ~
^' ~5> y
a.
o
~ ~ ~
;,:
ti 1 ~
Q',
~ ~~~~ v -
~~ia~~; ~
Y ` ~~ ~
~ ~~ ~.l
.J ~ = y ' ~ !,ail
' o°
-
3~ ~ ~ =3° ~ W; , ~~''
~' , ..
STREET a ~- y
~~:_=..
• n
v, ~ ,.
~
A r v
~ .`
,
r
~ --
~~ ~
i
\ / -
= C
~' J i
~ ~; ~ I
~, ~` _
43