The URL can be used to link to this page

01-25-82 agenda~l /y CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 40 Agenda January 25, 1982 The ~IOnorable Mayor and rlembers of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Discussion of Mixed Land Use Development City of Edina Council Member Bunce has requested that an item be~-placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda to give the council an opportunity to discuss the noise decibels and potential traffic problems relating to this development. Therefore, this item is placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda for discussion. purposes. • Respectfully submitted, ~a C~ G Karl Nollenber~g~~ City Manager ICN/e~ a cc: Community Development Director ~ ~ ~° y ~ "~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P P ~~ ~ C~ ~ ~Lti ,y~~ ~ ~~ 6~ 4'~ ~~ R~,.: ~c-v ~. ~~ ~ ~ d` ~~ ~/ ~ ~~ L S~ ` N J~` J ~~~ ~~~ ~~' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 39 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council rlembers Subject: Discussion of Responsibilities of Advisory Commissions Mayor Hamilton has requested that there be a discussion item placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda for purposes of discussing the titles of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission and the Human Rights Commission. The Mayor has suggested that the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission should perhaps be called the Community Services Advisory Commission, and that the Human Rights Commission be designated as the Human Relations Commission. The intent of both name changes would be to broaden the scope of responsi- . bility for these respective commissions. Attached to this council letter is a copy of a council letter dated November 29, 1979, wherein the staff proposed that the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission become a Community Services Advisory Commission. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Conununity Services Director KN/eja f~ _ CITY OF RICHFIELD, b1INNESOTA • ~~ Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 371 Agenda November 29, 1979 The Honorable DZayor and . Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Proposed Change in Park and Recreation Advisory Commission A Park and Recreation Advisory Commission was created by city council resolution in 1973. There have been amending resol- utions since that time, the most recent in December of 1977, which provided for youth representation on the Park and Recreation Comm- ission, in lieu of a separate Youth Advisory Commission. At its regular meeting in August, 1979 the commission was in- formed of the city's administrative reorganization concept. At the regular meeting in October, the commission requested an oppor- tunity to further discuss the reorganization and the Community Ser- vices Department organization and that of the rest of the city ad- ministration along with financial ramifications. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission then discussed their role in the re- organization. It was the unanimous recommendation of those members present that the city council be informed that the present Park and Recreation Advisory Conunission is willing to undertake expanded responsibilities in conjunction with the city reorganization and the consolidation of functions embodied iil the Department of Conu-nunity Services. It is the position of the Community Services Director, in which I concur, that the proposal of the Park and Recreation Comm- ission to assume expanded responsibilities as a Community Services Advisory Commission be given approval by the city council. The council appointed commission membership is an effective advisory board, and helps provided the needed "pulse of the community." The membership keeps well informed on matters and gives careful, well thought-through consideration to times brought before them, serving as a sounding board for the staff, council and the whole of the conununity. The Community Services Department includes many activ- ities that are highly visible to the community, and I believe it would serve the city well to have an advisory commission to monitor and make recorlmendations regarding those activities and responsibilities. ,~ t~5 ~~, ~ T} * k ...n~ik - t ~:'ik `SWWlJi¢. sY.~~AV j~~a ~i~• ~~ Y'r~4~3i. :-. ... l~'m iii§~::.~w~.hui:;64c~... _ .._.y..__._ _,.. _..~. r,.~ ._,. _..;,.i.ta.i ° _ __ .s±c._.c at~,F ~~, ,~.zv1i, ' ~s ~~ Council Letter No. 371 -2- November~29, 1979 Attached to this letter is a resolution for city council consideration which provides for expansion of the Park and Recre- ation Advisory Commission to serve as a Comrlunity Services Advisory Commission. Respectfully submitted, " ~~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/ej a cc: Community Services Director RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION A~ti1ENDING EARLIER RESOLUTIONS RELATED TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PARK AND RECREATION ADVISORY COb~i~IISSION ` FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A CO,li~IUNITY SERVICES ADVISORY ~`"'~ CO.II~IISSION WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 4960, passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield on April 9, 1979, the Richfield Park and Recreation Advisory Commission was established and directed as to membership and purpose, and WHEREAS, subsequent resolutions have been adopted from time to time by the city council for purposes of amending the membership or purpose of the Richfield Parlc and Recreation Advisory Com~-nission, and -- WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is in the process of reorgani- zation which will provide for an expansion of departmental services from the former Park and Recreation Department to the Community Services Department, and WHEREAS, it has been determined that the interests of the city can best be served by a correlating expansion of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission purpose to a Community Services Ad- visory Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, that amendments to the establishment of the Richfield Park and Recreation Advisory Commission be made as . follows: 1. That Resolution No. 4960, establishing the Richfield Park and Recreation Commission, and all subsequent amendments to said Resolution, are hereby repealed. 2. That there is hereby created a Community Services Commission . 3. The Commission shall serve in a direct advisory capacity to the city council. Staff services for the commission shall be provided by the Community Services Department of the city. - 4. The commission shall consist of eleven (11) regular members, all of whom shall be residents of the City of Richfield. They shall be appointed by the city council and shall be subject to removal, with or without cause, by the city council. In making the appointments to the commission, the city council shall undertake to secure a representa- tive balance among various groups and interests within the community. T~•~o (2) of the eleven (11) regular members shall be youth. Nine (9) of the eleven (11) regular members shall be adults, and the city council shall give due regard to representation from (a) senior citizens, (b) handicapped persons and parents of mentally and physically handicapped persons (c) the business com*~unity, (d) the public and private schools, (e.} the community's -_ athletic organizations, (f) the clergy, and (g) homemakers. ~ ~` In addition to the eleven (11) members of the commission, it shall have three (3) non-voting, ex-officio members. Such ex-officio members shall be selected as follows: One (1) member shall be appointed by the city council - from among its members; one (1) shall be appointed by the school board from among its members or the school district staff, and one(1) shall be appointed by the planning commission from among its members. 5. Regular members shall be appointed in January of each year by the city council to serve three (3) year terms, except in the case of the original commission. The regular members of the original co~-nmission shall be those of the now disbanded Park and Recreation Advisory Comm- ission including their current term of office. Terms of the members of the commission shall begin on the first day of February of the year of appointment and shall con- tinue until the first day of February of the year in which their appointment expires, or until their successors are selected, subject, however, to prior termination as other- wise provided in this resolution. Selection of ex-officio members shall be made annually and, insofar as possible, in January of each year, with (_ 4 such ex-officio members serving for a term of one year . or until their successors are appointed. 6. The commission shall be advisory to the city council on matters relating to community service facilities, programs and finances. This shall include, but not be limited to, community service related to capital improvement projects, recreation programming, the community center, the nature center, the ice arena, the golf course, the swimming pool general government buildings, L/H/N maintenance, park maintenance, street maintenance, sewer maintenance, water maintenance, city motor pool and any other item referred to it by the city council. 7. Any of the following sizall cause the office a regular member to become vacated: a) death; b) disability or failure to serve, shown by failure to attend three (3) consecutive regular meetings of the commission without written permission of the commission to be excused; c) removal of legal resi- dence from the city; d) resignation in ~•~riting; e) removal by the city council; and f) election or appointment to a public office. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 29 t:, day of November, 1979. Loren L. Law Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, Acting City Cler:~ ~s CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 38 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City City of Richfield Council Council Members: Subject Proposed Charter Amendment Relating To the Amendment and Repeal of Ordinances At the December 14, 1981 city council meeting, the city council referred to the charter commission an ordin- ance which would amend Section 3.10 of the city charter re- lating to the amendment and repeal of ordinances. The purpose of the ordinance would be to amend the charter in such a way as to indicate that, on ordinance changes, "old matter to be omitted" would be indicated in the ordinance • by "lining it through." Presently the charter requires that the material to be omitted be enclosed in brackets. Reading ordinances which have substantial changes being made in them can be confusing when the brackets are used to denote deleted material. At the January 12, 1982 city charter commission meeting the commission approved this ordinance change. Attached to this letter is a copy of the transmittal order from the charter commission, and a copy of the proposed charter amendment. This ordinance has been placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda for first reading consideration. Respectfully submitted, f •~ . r a Karl Nollenberger' City Manager KN/eja cc: City Clerk TRANSMITTAL ORDER To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the Coun~,il of the City of ~,, Richfield, Minnesota: We, the undersigned, being duly qualified and acting members of .~ the Charter Commission of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, do hereby respectfully submit and deliver to you the attached proposed ordinance amending Section 3, /~ of the City Charter of the City of Richfield. We hereby respectfully proposed, recommend and submit for adoption, by unanimous vote of the City Council and approval by the Mayor of the Cit , e attached proposed ordinance this l Z day of ~,~ 19~. i 1s J. ~ ~. CHARTER AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO. CHARTER AMENDMENT ORDINANCE RELATING TO AMENDMENT AND REPEAL OF ORDINANCES, AMENDING SECTION 3.10 OF-THE .RICHFIELD CITY CHARTER.. CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. Secti,on~3.10 of the City Charter of Richfield relating to amendment and repeal of ordinances is hereby. amended to provide as follows: "Section 3.10. Amendment and Repeal of Ordinances. Every ordinance repealing a previous ordinance, section, or subdivision thereof shall give the number, if any, and the title of the ordinance to be repealed in whole or in part. No ordinance, section,: or subdivision thereof shall be amended by reference to the title alone. Such an amending ordinance shall set forth in full each section or subdivision to be amended and shall indicate new matter by underscoring and old matter to be omitted by eae~es~~g-~~-~~-l~~ae3~e~s lining it through. In newspaper publication of ordinances the same indications of omitted and new matter shall be used. except.. that italics or bold-faced type may be substituted for under- scoring and omitted matter may be printed in capital letters within parentheses." Section 2. Effective Date.. This ordinance is effective ninety (90) days after its publication, subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 410.12., Subdivision 7. i Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota, this day of 198 . ATTEST: Mayor r City Clerk CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 37 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable P~iayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield __ Council Members: ~1 "tom"`2L ST ~ R"SZS Z_ - ~t N ~= ~ ~ ~; ~ mil- G n v c~~ ~ S ~ /2~-S Subject: Special City Council Meeting January 25, 1982 vVith State Legislators Regarding Various Legislative Actions A special city council/state legislators meeting has been scheduled for 5:30 p.m. on Monday, January 25, 1982 to discuss various legislative actions with our local legislators. Attached to this council letter are copies of 13 Legislative Position Statements which have been passed by the Richfield City Council at their December 28, 1981 and January 11, 1982 city council meetings. These legislative statements will form the basis for the joint meeting on January 25 meeting. Respectfully submitted, 1 ..~ ~ , ~ ! .~ ,~I Karl Nollenberge~r City Manager cc: Program Directors KN/eja NO. 1 .LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT LOCAL FIRE PROTECTION ON STATE HIGHWAYS -The purpose of this statement support for a change in the State's fire protection on State highways. is to express the City of Richfield's reimbursement procedure for local Current Legislation The State law covering reiumbursement for fire service, adopted in x.977, directs the State Commissioner of Transportation to reimburse local fire departments for__ordinary expenses incurred while exting- uishing a fire or eliminating the danger of afire or explosion on any State highway. The Department of Transportation's disbursement policies are extremely restrictive, and the program as presently administered is not cost-efficient. Only half of the State's fire departments have been able to successfully claim reimbursement for services, and the administration costs are taking $30,000 of the $90,000 annual expenditure. Impact on City of Richfield The law as administered has had little positive impact on the. City of Richfield, and the negative impact is growing. Less than one- third of the city's claims for 1981 have been reimbursed, yielding an estimated $1,000 from over $3,.000 in claims. The cost of .the services provided in 1981 have been over $5,000, but the restrictions placed on reimbursement by the MnDOT have precluded the city from claiming the: true cost of fire service. . :Persons traveling through Richfield on State roads who experience _ _ _ __ a fire or accident are not receiving timely responses from the Fire Division as an indreict result of the MnDot policies. Since all fire department claims for service must be investigated and justified by the State Patrol, the Patrol officers have been instructed not to call for local help at emergencies until the Patrol reaches the scene of an accident and verifies that fire or emergency medical help is needed. This has resulted in people waiting over 15 minutes for medical help when the normal response is two minutes. It is suggested that the city council support efforts by the State legislature to either reduce the impediments to cost-effective claim reimbursement or repeal the law and re-direct the alloted funds to other local government aid programs. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 .. NO. 2 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT LEVY LIMITS • The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for elimination. of the levy limits, or substantial modification to the previously applicable levy-limits. legislation. _ Current legislation The 1971 Minnesota Legislature established a piece of legislation which essentially limited a city's ability to support its programs and services through property tax revenues to a six percent annual increase. The original levy limit law, although changed mahy times, has remained essentially the same in its impact since that time. In 1979, the six percent limit was increased to eight percent, and many of the excluded levies which had previously been permitted were eliminated or severely restricted. In the approximately ten years since the original levy limit law was imposed, the annual rate of inflation has grealty exceeded six percent or even eight percent. Cities have, therefore, been forced to continually reduce expenditures and/or programs because they have not been able to even keep pace in their major revenue sources with the rate of inflation. Furthermore, changes in the levy limit law have often times served to penalize those cities that successfully held down their property tax levies in the previous year. The leg- islature has repealed the levy limit law effective for taxes payable in 1983, but has also indicated that in 1982 the issue will be subjected to study and potential reenactment. Impact on City of Richfield The City of Richfield receives more than one-half of its operating revenues from the combination of property tax and local government aid - - --- revenues, which are subject to the levy limit law. The imposition of the levy limit law has forced the City of Richfield to severely restrain growth of activities, and, in fact, the number of municipal employees in 1982 is significantly lower than the number during the. early to mid-1970's, despite the addition of several entirely new services and programs, such as opening of a municipal golf course. The City of Richfield has: consistently opposed the levy limit law in that it provides little flexibility to the city, is contrary to basic principles of local self government and. accountability, and fails to recognize changing local conditions as to either expenditure needs of revenue sources.. The city remains strongly opposed to any such levy limitation, and recommends that the Minnesota Legislature take no action to reenact levy limits. If repeal of the levy limit law cannot be maintained, the City of Richfield recommends that the following elements be incorporated into any new levy limit law: ..•~ ~ Legislative Position Statement . ~ Levy Limits Page 2 . A. Levy.Limit Base 1. Increase index A more accurate index of governmental costs .should be incorporated into the law as a basis for automatically adjusting the levy limit. Increases in local assessed valuation should also be taken into account, so that the combined effect of levy limits and growing assessed valuation is a stabilization rather than a reduction of mill rates. 2. Method for fixing base figure The levy limit base, to which any increase index is applied, should not be set arbitrarily based on city tax levies for a particular year.. A city's property tax levy for a given year may have little relationship to its total expenditure needs in subsequent years. At the very least an average figure based on several years' levies, adjusted for inflation, should be used as a starting point. 3. Population Any levy limit should recognize that increased population requires increased revenues and thus should provide base increases in direct proportion to population increases. Because many costs are fixed, decreases in population should not result in a base decrease. 4. State and federal aid decreases --~ ~""- Minnesota cities have become dependent on federa revenue sharing, state local government aid and other state and federal aids and-grant payments. If federal and state aids-are reduced or frozed, some alternative method must be allowed to replace the loss. The city reconunends that the levy base should be adjusted to allow for replace- ment of funds due to failure of state or federal aid to increase, or due to decreases or payment delays of such aid. 5. .Commercial, industrial, residential growth Any levy limit law should recognize that new commercial, industrial, or residential growth causes increased city costs. Some of these are one-time capital costs for extension of city services to a particualr development, which should be allowed as a special levy to the extent that such services are not paid for through bonded indebtedness or special assessments. Any additional costs for general services to the new .development should be added into the permanent levy limit base. If this is not done, insufficient revenues will be provided for the required services and a strong disincentive for encouraging new development within cities would exist. ° Legislative Position Statement ' Levy Limits Page 3 B. Special Levies Special levies are an important part of any levy limit law, because they allow some flexibility based on special needs and circumstances that may. affect individual cities. Therefore.. we support maintaining all of the special levies 'that are" currently allowed and, in addition, recommends that the following special levies also be .included in any new levy limit law: 1. Special elections The legislature should allow for a special levy so that a city may recover local costs of holding special elections for Congress and the State Senate and. House of Represent- atives. 2. Mandated state and federal programs -The cost of local government is being influenced more and more by state and. federally mandated programs and .increased mandated benef its or costs for in-place programs. Some of the costs which bear no relationship to any allowed percentage levy limit increases are: workers' compensa- tion benefits; binding arbitration; federal social security; minimum wage laws; comprehensive planning; OSHA. Therefor we recommend that the legislature re-instate the special .levy for new and increased program costs mandated by state law and initiate a special levy for increased costs caused by new. federally mandated programs. 3. Natural disasters and lawful orders.. The legislature should re-instate the special levies allowing for expenditures of funds as a result of natural disasters and lawful orders. A city cannot really plan for either of these events, and has no control over them. Neither of these special levies would be used often, but would be extremely important to those cities needing to use them. 4. Energy We recommend that the legislature enact a special levy to pay for costs incurred by cities for energy improvements,. including capital expenditures. Voluntary energy conserva- tion improvements, as well as required expenses, should be allowed to be funded out of this special levy. ,. `~ Legislative Position Statement . Levy Limits Page 4 C. Size of City Covered by Levy Limits In both 1973 and 1975, amendments were passed to the levy limit law excluding certain cities from this law on the basis of population, because it became obvious that the normal political forces at work in smaller cities made levy limits unnecessary. In 1981, the law was applied to all" cities for 1982 only. If new levy limits arP enacted for 1983 or thereafter, the, legislature should at least exclude all cities under 5,000 population from levy limits. D. Mandated Programs-- ~ - _ ' Levy limit laws cause especially difficult problems for cities to the extent that the growth in the number and cost of federal and state mandated: programs is not recognized. Congress and the :legislature substitute their judgements for local budget priorities - yet the program costs must be met within restrictive levy limits. Therefore, the following actions are recommended: 1. As an alternative to special levies (see part B) the state should .provide full or partial reimbursement directly from state revenues to carry out state mandated programs. 2. The state should adopt a policy of "deliberate restraint" on its mandated programs, including a mandatory fiscal note identifying local governmental costs on any new mandated programs when they are introduced in the leg- islature and a statement of compelling state-wide interest to accompany all state mandates. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 3 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY TAX COLLECTIONS The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for an accelerated collection and remittance of property tax revenues. Current Status Under current law, counties need not distribute property tax collections to cities until three days after the June. 1 and November 1 date of property tax payments to the county. FuYthermore, the county does not pay interest on collected but undistributed-funds until 45 days after the settlement date. After that time, the county must pay interest, but only at-eight percent. Impact on City of Richfield Property taxes are currently paid to cities from counties in two semi-annual payments, usually in July and December, a system which often results in cash flow problems for cities. These cash flow problems have been aggravated by the change in the local government aid payment schedule which concentrates all of the LGA payments into the second half of the calendar year. In most counties, particularly those with computer accounting capability, the collections are virtually 100 percent available within one working week after the settlement date. While counties are retaining funds and collecting interest at market rates, many cities must borrow money at market rates to meet their cash flow needs. It is the position of the City of Richfield that the legislature require counties with computer capability to distribute to cities 90 percent of the property tax revenues on hand no later than the 15th day of the month following each property tax due date. This. would mean that 90 percent of-the taxes would be paid to cities. by June l5 and November 15. We further recommend that the remainder be distributed to the cities by the last day of those months. Finally, it is recommended that the legislature modify the property tax collection system so that taxes are paid quarterly. Given the current statutory dates for local levy certification, and practicalities with county property tax billing procedures, the first payment date should be March 31 of each year Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 4 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT LOCAL GOVERNMENT AIDS The purpose of this statement is to express the .City of Richfield's support for changes in our ability to anticipate local government aids and to finance operations based on anticipation of those aids. _ Current Status In 1981, the local government aid payment schedule was changed so that, instead of receiving four equal installments cf local government aid during the months of March, July,_.September and December, cities now receive six equal installments of local govern- ment aid payments each month, July through December. The result of this change in local government aid payment schedule is that cities have experienced additional cash flow problems, because of such a large portion of their revenues being withheld until the second half of the calendar year. Furthermore, the governor has delayed the local government aid and homestead credit payments which cities were due to receive in November and December, 1981, to some unspecified future date. The withholding of this local government aid, already anticipated as revenue for most cities' operations through .the end of 1981, has resulted in serious cash flow and/or financial difficulties for many cities. Impact on Richfield The City of Richfield experienced a $968.,000 reduction in anticipated revenues for November and December, resulting from with- . holding of the local. government aid and homestead credit payments. Because of the withholding of these payments, and the previously ___authorized .change_.in. _ the_ -annual_ 1oc_al gQVernment ai~nayme~l~s~h~duL~, ' _ the city's general fund balance will be severely diminished by the beginning of 1982 and, in fact, the city will experience a cash flow deficit by February of 1982. It is the recommendation of the City of Richfield that cities. should be granted authority to borrow in anticipation of receiving local government aids, in the same way that they. can now borrow in anticipation of property tax receipts, so that they have an extra tool to cope with the revised payment schedule and further payment delays. Furthermore, it is recommended that the legislature require the payment of interest on local governemnt aids deferred for cities, in the same way as the governor proposed to pay interest delayed aid payments for school districts. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 5 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT IMPOSITION OF MAXIMUM FEES AND CHARGES BY STATE. LAW The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for removal of maximum fees and charges from state law. Current. Legislation Currently, municipalities are authorized to regulate by license any activity which, when unrestrained, might adversely affect the public health, morals, safety or welfare. Cities have adequate leg- islative authority for almQSt-any licensing ordinance. While a c-ity may not use license fees as a guise for generating excess revenues or taxation, the city license and. permit granting function is a source of revenue to a municipality which should ensure that the city's cost of issuing the license and regulating the License business is recovered. However, several license fees are regulated by state law and can be raised only by legislative action, including the following: - The maximum license fee for an off-sale liquor license is $200. - The maximum fee for an on-sale wine license is $2,000. - The maximum fee for regulating the retail of cigarettes, cigarette papers or wrappers is $12. - The maximum fee for bottle club licenses is $300 per year. Impact on City of Richfield The City of Richfield, through its municipal licensing authority, _ ___ regulates many business activities, including those for which the state has established a maximum fee. Generally, the statutes granting authority to issue licenses and permits do not specify maximum fees, and court decisions have provided ample limitation and direction that the city's power to set license fees is restricted in that revenues produced must be related to the cost of issuing the license and regulating the license business. It appears inconsistent that the municipal licensing authority is restricted in the forenoted areas by .the state establishing maximum fee provisions, when the cost to various municipalities for processing and regulating such activities may vary widely. The City of Richfield feels that the legislature should repeal these maximum fee provisions and allow cities to decide. locally the appropriate fee to charge for such licenses. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO . 6 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT DEDICATION OF A PORTION OF SALES TAX FOR CITIES 'l~he purpose of this support for legislation sales tax for cities. Current Status statement is to express the City of Richfield's which would dedicate a portion of the state The present Minnesota sales tax is imposed on certain goods and services state wide, and revenues from that sales tax are used to support the state's general fund. Impact on City of Richfield ~'or cities to be able to budget and plan in a rational and orderly manner, they must have a stable, reliable and predictable source of revenue other than the property tax. Experience with delays in local government aid payments, and cut backs in those payments over the past two years has demonstrated that that system of revenues is neither reliable or predictable. The cities are subjected to the dual uncertainty of not knowing whether the .state's revenues .will be adequate, and not knowing how or when the legislature and governor will choose to make fudding cut backs if state revenues do fall short. • Under a system in which cities derive a substantial part of their revenues from state sources, cities must expect that when state revenues fall short, their state aid funding will also decline. However, cities must have assurances that they will not be forced to absorb a dispro- portionate share of a revenue short fall. As a corollary, it is also reasonable for cities to expect state funding for local government aid -- -- ~~increase -in proportion to increases -6f _-sate -revenues-`-'r or tTiese reasons, the City of Richfield feels that the appropriation for local government aids be tied directly to a specified share of the state sales tax collections. Historically, the state aid appropriation has been equivalent to about 1.5 cents of the sales sales tax. The dedication of a share of the sales tax should commence immediately through legislative action, although we recommend that ultimately this provision be enacted as a constitutional amendment. It is further recommended that the revenues be distributed to cities on a monthly basis, based on the month's sales tax collection. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 7 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT. PREFERENCE FOR A STATE. REDISTRICTING PLAN The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's preference for a state redistricting plan. Current Status The Minnesota Legislature is currently. redrawing legislative district boundaries to preserve the integrity of representative government in accordance with the population data established in-the 1980 census.. The City of Richfield must also evaluate its precinct boundaries, and is presently seeking to establish district boundaries based on the. 1980 census data, in accordance with the city charter. Many proposals have been studied and submitted_to the state legislature, although, at this time., no final plan has been promulgated.. Impact on the City of Richfield Several of the redistricting. proposal which have been studied by .the state legislature would create .legislative districts that would fragment municipal constituencies. The fragmentation of a municipality could impede the workings of local government by diluting the interests and concerns of a municipality that could be different from those of other municipal jurisdictions represented in the. same district. Furthermore, from a practical standpoint, the administering of .elections • which is done by local governments could be extremely complicated by a redistricting plan that is not cognizant of municipal precinct boundaries, or municipal boundaries as a whole.. It is the position of the City of Richfield that any state redistricting plan recognize the municipal boundaries, and not split the municipality for legislative - - --district purposes. If such occurs, it is at least requested that such legislative district boundaries recognize municipal precincts and/ or district boundaries. .Finally, it is the preference of the City of Richfield to be placed in a legislative district with. cities of the second and third class but not with cities of the first class, if it becomes necessary to combine Richfield or portions of Richfield with other municipalities or portions thereof. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO . 8 LEGISLATIVE .POSITION STATEMENT C~ • RELOCATION ASSISTANCE The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for changes in the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. Current Legislation Minnesota Statutes provide that any city in Minnesota which acquires property for minicipal purposes, must provide all relocation assistance, service, payments and benefits provided by the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Re a-1 Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, and any implementing regulations developed-by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Impact on the City of Richfield The City of Richfield is required to meet the relocation .assist- ance provisions of the federal legislation by state law and by virtue of the federal act and regulations applying to redevelopment activi- ties assisted under Community Development Block Grant programs. The major impact of this legislation on the. City of Richfield has occurred in implementation of the L/H/N redevelopment project. Development plans for this area call for HRA acquisition of a sub- stantial number of properties. The intent of congress in passing the Relocation Assistance law is to .provide for equitable treatment of citizens by the government when the government is taking property, be it through purchase or through eminent domain. The government's responsibility is to ensure that persons affected be assisted in order to relocate without incurring a substantial hardship. However, the City of Richfield has acquired several properties in conjunction with the L/H/N project implementation which appear to be distortions -~ of the congressional intent. -These properties were placed on the market due to condition in no way created or encouraged by the L/H/N project. In one instance, a property was sold because the property owner purchased a business in another state. In another, a property was sold because of re-marriage, where the new spouse did not wish to live in a property which had been occupied by a previous spouse. In each of these instances, the availability of-the property on the real estate market and the HRA subsequent purchase of the property were related to personal events in the lives of the property owners, rather than events in the marketplace or pressure created by the redevelopment activity. However, for each of these acquisitions, the city was required to pay relocation assistance to the property owner or to tenants occupying the property. The City of Richfield supports the concept that government should provide assistance to persons displaced or in some way harmed by its actions. However, it is the City's position that there should be a recognition in the law that not all occupants or project properties are displaced by reason of the project, and that some persons would have relocated regardless. In such circumstances, it is our position that the acquiring authority should not be required to provide relocation assistance. ~'~ '~ ' Legislative Position Statement • Relocation. Assistance Page 2 The City of Richfield supports amendments in the legislation which would bring greater uniformity to administration of the Act,. including those dealing with eligibility of benefits. We also support some moderate adjustment of the benefit limits to reflect economic changes which have occurred since the limits were established. The City of Richfield opposes any legislative proposals which would increase the variables related to relocation: (l) by removing limits altogether, or increasing the burden upon the public, such as eligibility for benefits being extended to persons indirectly affected by acquisition; (2) a replacement housing payment with no dollar limit; {3) a-one-time payment for the property tax differential between the acquired dwelling and the replacement dwelling; (4) doubling of the payments for tenants and certain others and appar- ently not requiring relocations with standard dwellings; and (5) requiring the public agency to pay for two appraisals for property being purchases. Under current rules, the public agency can reimburse the owner for one appraisal, up to a maximum dollar amount. However, our usual practice. is to obtain three appraisals, thus ensuring that four appraisals are usually completed. ~ • Adopted by the Rchf field City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 9 _ LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT INTEREST ON UNPAID UTILITY BILLS The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for legislation .which would allow interest to be charged. on unpaid water and sewer bills which are being .certified for collection through the property tax. Current Legislation Current legislation prohibits cities from charging interest on unpaid utility bills which-are being certified to the county for. collection. Municipalities are authorized to charge a certification fee, for purposes of recovering their special .costs incurred in pre- paring the. delinquent accounts for certification and collection by the county. Impact on Richfield Each year, Richfield has more than 800, out of approximately. 15,000, sewer and water accounts which are certified to the county for collection. The proprieters of these accounts do not make payments on their water and sewer bills during the course of the year, but rather allow the charges to accumulate to be put on the property tax bill as an unpaid assessment. They then make payments in a subsequent year in conjunction with their property tax payments. Because of the number of delinquent accounts, and the dollar value of the water and sewer services sold to those accounts, the cost of interest lost by the city for carrying those delinquent accounts is reasonably significant, approximately $10,000 on the delinquent 1981 accounts. With the. increased need for the city to tighten control .- -- ~v-e-r -its- cash Liow,~~it -is only r~asonab~e-that-reyi~r-dtio~~ sir~al-cl--b-~- amended to permit cities to charge interest on delinquent accounts in the same way. that other businesses can charge interest on the past due balance on delinquent accounts. Adopted by the Richfield City Council December 28, 1981 NO. 10 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT PAYMENT OF BONUSES .TO CITY EMPLOYEES The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's support for legislation which would permit the payment of bonuses to municipal employees. Current Legislation. Minnesota State Law currently prohibits the use of any public monies for purposes of paying bonuses to municipal employees. The law clearly prohibits the payment of bonuses under any circumstances or for any purposes. -- Impact on Richfield A significant aspect of any employee productivity improvement or motivation program includes the ability of the employer to give bonuses fos various reasons, such as innovative ideas., suggestion box winners, safety program participants, etc. Under such programs, the bonus is not intended to be an overwhelming sum of money but rather to be a token demonstrating the employer's recognition of the employee's contribution. It is well accepted in personnel man- agement theory that a cash bonus can have the effect of stimulating productivity at an overall cost savings to the employer. Accordingly, it is appropriate to support legislation which would. allow city. employees to be paid bonuses in ari amount not to exceed $500. Adopted by the Richfield City Council Decemk~er 28 , 1981 f • .''T':` NO . 1 1 'fib "~ LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT ~''~~ REQUIREMENT FOR PROOF OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE RELATED TO BUSINESS LICENSURE The purpose of this statement is to convey the City of Richfield' ;_ opposition to a requirement enacted by the 1981 Legislature that k proof of workers' compensation insurance must be provided to the '~ ~_- city before any business license may be issued or contract may be entered into by the city. 3 :~ Current Legislation -- -_ I Effective July 1, 1981, state law requires that every state t.: ., ; or local licensing agency shall withhold the issuance of a license permit to operate a business in Minnesota until the applicant presents acceptable evidence of compliance with workers' compen- ~. sation insurance ooverage requirements. Furthermore, the city is .4 prevented from entering into any contract before receiving from ~ all contracting parties some acceptable evidence of compliance with the state's workers' compensation coverage requirements. .'. Impact on the Citv of Richfield ~ ~~ It is the position of the City of Richfield that this legislation uts the burden of enforcin the state's workers' com ensation law P g P ~ on the municipality, with no accompanying financial support for 'f undertaking such an enforcement activity. The City of Richfield .3 ,, annually issues hundred of business license for purposes ranging ;~ from vending machines to operation of liquor establishments. The -~ administrative costs in soliciting proof of workers' compensation insurance, and the corresponding ill will engendered by the bus-. ~~ finesses who see such requirements as another proof of government gone awry represents a major cost to the municipality. `~ It is the recommendation of the City of Richfield that this requirement be withdrawn, and that the state maintain responsibility for enforcement of its workers' compensation regulations. Adopted by the Richfield City Council January 11, 1982 ~ .~:.r~ ~._ . ;~_: ~~.. :%; .: ., ~i ~~' :; :x.: ~, ~. .~j :~ NO. 12 LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION • The purpose of this statement is to convey the City of Richfield' request for designated representation on the Metropolitan Airports. Commission . Current Legislation The Metropolitan Airports Commission is designated in state -.law with responsibility for administering the airports in the seven- :. county Twin City metro~ol-itan area. Representatives on the MAC are appointed by the governor, with each of~the seven counties. to have one member, and the cities of Minneapolis and St, Paul to each have a member. The chairman is appointed by the governor with no specific constituency of representation required.. Impact on the City of Richf field It is the position of the City of Richfield that the significant impact of the Twin Cities Internation Airport on the. city, which is as great as that experienced. by any other municipality in any of the seven counties, is significant enough. that Richfield should have a designated representative .spot on the MAC. Adopted by the Richfield City Council January 11, 1982 f ~ '.F`=; , . CITY OF RICHFIELD LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT ~;~, NO. 13 SUBJECT: Tax Increment Financing The purpose of this statement is to convey Richfield's opinion that no substantitive changes in Minnesota's existing - .Q;: tax financing law. are necessary. Position of the City of Richfield . Tax increment financing has permitted many cities in various parts of the state, incl~dirig-Richfield, to initiate and develop rehabilitation, redevelopment, housing and economic development ,_ projects. Presently, tax increment financing represents the most feasible and effective legal strategy available to cities to pre- ' serve and improve the physical and economic. environrnent in their communities . It is the position of the City of Richfield that no substantive changes in Minnesota's existing tax increment financing law are nec- essary, and the city recommends that no substantitive changes be made in the law until there is sufficient experience with this finan- sing tool to determine if changes are needed. The orie deficiency ;;;~~>~-~_~ which the City of Richfield feels does need correcting, and could most appropriately be corrected immediately, is that. which allowed the City of Eden Prairie to create a redevelopment district inclusive of a significant amount of vacant land.- The creation of that die- trict appears to be contrary to the intent of the tax increment law, and represents a deficiency which should be studied and corrected in order to maintain the credibility of the financing vehicle as a tool for Minnesota communities. Adopted by the Richfield City Council January 1 1 , 1982 `~ .~ :~ .s_w ,. ~~ LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT INTEREST RATE CEILING ON GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS- The purpose of this statement. is to express the City of Richfield's opposition to the interest rate ceiling imposed on General Obligation Bonds. ` Current Polic State law presently prohibits a municipality from paying an interest rate in excess of 12 percent on General Obligation Bonds. This interest rate ceiling, .established in 1981, expires during 1982. If legislation amending this interest rate ceiling. is not adopted, the ceiling reverts to nine percent. Impact on the City of Richfield The City of Richfield in December, 1981, sought a public sale of $2.450 million in general obligation/tax increment bonds.. The city. received expressions of interest from two large syndicate bidders who wished to purchase the bonds but could not do so at an interest rate of less than 12 percent. Current bond market conditions are such that the interest rate on long term securities (i.e., of 15 to 20 years duration) has exceeded 12 percent for approximately two months, with no downward trend in sight. The inability of the .City of Richfield to market its bonds, when the~city has an excellent AA bond rating, is due entirely to the arbitrary interest rate ceiling imposed. by state law. -.The City of Richfield _ supports elimination of the interest rate ceiling. If the legislature wishes to retain a ceiling on interest rates, it is recommended that the ceiling be established in such a way that it reflects changing market conditions. C, elf CITY OF RICHFIELD. LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT SUBJECT: Wine Sales in Grocery Stores The purpose of_this statement is to express the City of - Richfield's opposition to the sale of wine in grocery stores. Current Policy State 'law presently prohibits the sale of any alcoholic beverages stronger than beer in establishments other than licensed liquor. establishments. The. liquor licensing requirements of the law provide a municipality the ability to regulate the availabil- ity and nature of sales of alcoholic beverages within their com- munities. However, legislation has been developed which is likely to be before the state legislature during the 1981 session which would exempt wine sales. in grocery stores from the licensing and liquor s ale regulations of municipalities. Impact on the Cityof Richfield The City of Richfield presently owns and operates three off- sale liquor retail establishments. A significant portion of our liquor sales are wine sales. The authorization fQr grocery stores to sell wine would have a major potential detrimental impact on the city's liquor revenues, which are the major source of funding for capital improvements within the community. Furthermore, exemption of grocery store wine sales from the fairly stringent liquor licensing requirements now contained in state law could present additional opportunity for abuses in liquor sales which would be beyond the ability of the city to control. The City of Richfield wishes to go on record in opposition to authorization of wine sales in grocery stores... Adopted by the Richfield City Council March 9, 1981 ~~ /!%U CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City I~?anager Council Letter No. 36 Agenda January 25, 7.982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: ~~ Subject: Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Assessment Roll for C.P. 734, 727 and 761 Attached are resolutions declaring the costs to be assessed and ordering the preparation of the proposed assessment rolls for the following city projects: C.P. 761 Street Lighting C.P. 734 Alley Paving C.P. 727 Sidewalk Construction C~ The staff recommends that the city council pass these resolutions, enabling the assessment rolls to be prepared. At the February 8, 1982 council meeting, a resolution will, be presented to the council which will receive the assessment rolls and set a date for the public hearings on these projects. Respectfully submitted, n r L Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: Community Development Director City Engineer City Clerk C RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO-BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR C.P. 727 WHEREAS the following construction has been performed during 1981: Concrete sidewalks on thefpllowing streets; 76th Street - MSAS No. 3.6.1. • Penn. Avenue.- CMSAS No.. 502 Nicollet Avenue. - CMSAS No. 503 -~ 66th Street - CSAS No. 505 Nicollet Park and 67th and Harriet AND WHEREAS costs. have been determined for these improvements and the contract price for such improvemen is $99,337.53 and the. expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such _ improvement amount to $19,867.51, so-that the total cost of the improvemen is $ 119,205.04. WHEREAS, the City share of costs has been or will. be in the sum of $ 92,299.32. NOW, THEREFORE., BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rchfield,,Mnnesota as follows.: 1. That the cost of sidewalk construction in the above described areas to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be approximately $26,905.72 and therefore - this sum will be assessed against privately owned property benefited thereby. 2. That said assessment shall run for a period of 5 years and include interest at the rate to be determined at bond. sale. 3. The city clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the office of city clerk for public inspection. 4. The clerk shall notify the council upon completion of such proposed assessment. -2- Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th. day of January, 1982. John Hamilton,. Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia., K. Bergh, City. Clerk RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION. OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR C.P.. 734 WHEREAS the following construction has been performed during 1981: Concrete paving of the following alleys: Between From To 3rd and Clinton Avenue - Lyndale and Aldrich Avenues First and Stevens Avenues Garfield and Harriet Avenues 2nd and 3rd Avenues Oliver and Newton Avenue 65th and 66th Streets 65th and 66th Streets. Washburn and Xerxes Avenue Clinton and 3rd Avenue Stevens and 2nd Avenue Nicollet and First Avenue Queen and Russell Avenue Stevens and 2nd Avenue First and Stevens Avenue 73rd Street 75th Street-- 71st Street 73rd Street 71st Street 63rd Street 22nd Avenue 13th Avenue 66th Street 66th Street 71st Street 71st Street 68th Street 72nd Street 72nd Street 74th Street 76th Street 72nd Street 305 ft. south 73rd Street 470 ft. South Standish Avenue 14th Avenue 67th Street 67th Street 72nd Street 72nd Street 69th Street 73rd Street 73rd Street AND WHEREAS costs have been determined for these improvements and the contract price for such improvement is $211,637.55, and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvement amount to $52,909.39, so that the total cost of the - improvement is $ 264,546..94. WHEREAS, the City share of costs has been or will be in the sum of $ 16,359.26. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the cost of concrete alley construction in the above described areas to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be at least 20 percent of the total cost, and is presently estimated to be approximately $248,187.68 and therefore this sum will be assessed against privately owned property benefited thereby. 2. That said assessment shall run for a period of 20 years and include interest at the rate of to be determined at bond sale. • 3. The city engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the office of city clerk for public inspection. -2- 4. The clerk shall notify the council upon completion of such proposed assessment. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of January, 1982. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk • RESOLUTION NO. . RESOLUTION DECLARING. COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR C.P. 761 WHEREAS the following construction has been performed during _1981:. Street lighting on the following streets: Penn Avenue South from C.S.A.H. 62 to I-494; Nicollet Avenue South f~rom_C.S.A.H. 62 to 64th Street, and from 67th Street to I-494; Portland Avenue South from C.S.A.H. 62 to I-494 Miscellaneous AND WHEREAS costs have been determined for these improvements and the contract price for such improvement is $235,174.75 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvement amount to $35,276.21, so that the total cost of the improvement is $ 270,450.96. WHEREAS, the City share of costs has been or will be in the sum of $177, 756.92 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City . of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: 1. That the cost of street lighting construction in the above described areas to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be at least 20 percent of the total cost, and is presently estimated to be approxirtately $92,694.04, and therefore this sum will be assessed against privately owned property benefited thereby. 2. That said assessment shall run for a period of 20 years and include interest at the rate-"of to be determined at bond sale. 3. The city clerk shall forthwith calculate the proper .amount to be assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the office of city clerk for public inspection. 4. The clerk shall notify the council upon completion of such proposed assessment. _2_ Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of January, 1982..- John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk • ~ // CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 35 Agenda January 25, 182 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Golf Course Policies In late June of 1980, the city council adopted fees and charges as well as policies for the municipal golf course. In early August of 1980, the front nine of the regulation course was opened; in early September the back nine was opened. With the 1981 season, the Richfield Rich Acres Golf Course had its first full year of operation with the regulation length course. The Par course did not open until June, 1981. 192 will be the first full year of operation for the complete course. For the last year or so, the staff has been recording data and comments from users of the facility, as well as examining and evaluating the adopted policies. As a result, the staff is recommending changes in the golf course policy relating to league play and related to early Sunday morning golf. LEAGUE PLAY Interest in league play was expressed during the early planning for the golf course. By April, 1980, the staff had received approximately 25 written requests for league applica- tions. At that time, the council adopted a policy to allow league play on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. There appeared to be no demand for a Monday league. During 1981, a productivity analysis of daily rounds and receipts revealed that Monday had about 27o fewer rounds than the next lowest day, Friday, and about 55o fewer rounds than the highest rating day, Wednesday. At least one league has requested a transfer to Monday from Wed- nesday. Wednesday is the easiest day to sell. To maximize play and revenue, it is suggested that the policy relating to league play be amended to permit one nine of the regulation course to be utilized for league play on Mondays from approximately 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. The league play provides a guaranteed income plus additional revenues from rentals and concessions; the general public would continue to have access to the course. The Park and Recreation Advisory Corrllllission has unanimously recommended this modification of policy as outlined. Council Letter No. 35 -2- SUNDAY MORNING GOLF January 25, 1Q82 . On June 23, 1980, the city council adopted fees and charges for the golf course. The fee schedule provided a special rate for a nine-hole ticket, on Sunday only, that would be available before 7:00 a.m. only. The twilight special rate was continued in the 1981 fees and charges schedule. The 1982 fees and charges were adopted on October 5, 1981, and included a reduced rate for the early Sunday morning golf. However, the staff feels that it is important to clarify the early Sunday morning golf policy. The Park and Recreation Advisory Commission has reviewed the staff recommendation to continue the policy allowing golfers to play before 7:00 a.m. on Sunday morning, paying the twilight -fee. To assure that there is not a loss of potential 18-hole revenue and to accomodate property maintenance of the golf course, the followinq policy statements and/or clarifications are also recommended: 1. That all play be kept on the baclc nine of the course unless there are no players who have made reservations or desire to walk on for an 18 hole round on the front nine for a tee time. 2. That as a stipulation of this special rate, it is to be understood that maintenance on the back nine will be in progress during the course of their round. 3. That during the course of the 1982 season, this policy will be evaluated for cost effectiveness, affect on course maintenance, and overall merit. SUMMARY It is recommended policies outlined above morning golf. that the city council approve the golf course pertaining to league play and early Sunday Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: Community Services Director ~~ #~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Tlanager ~2~ The Honorable riayor and Members of the City Council ,City of Richfield Council Members: Council Letter No. 34 Agenda January 25, 1982 Subject: Board and Commission Appointments An item has been scheduled on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda for appointments to various boards and commissions. Council members have previously received copies of applications from persons interested in being appointed. Attached to this council letter are copies of applications which were not previously forwarded to council members, and a summary sheet, listing the various vacancies and the names of the persons applying for appointment to each commission. The appointments to be considered are as follows: Advisory Board of Health Four appointments for 2-year terms expiring January, 1984 need to be made. Three of the four incumbents, Stu Swanson, Lia Ozols, and David Johnson wish to be considered for reappointment. The membership requirements of this commission require that the membership must include three members who are health providers, and three consumers representing community organizations. One of the appointments in 1982 should be a health provider. Of the applicants, David Johnson does qualify as a health provider. Civil Service Commission One appointment for a three-year term expiring February, 1985 must be made. The incumbent, Mary Reiter, does not wish to be considered for reappointment. Enerqy Awareness Conunission This commission can have up to 15 members. The present mem- bership has been ten members. The council may appoint up to seven persons to this commission for three-year terms expiring in July, 1985. • Council Letter No. 34 -2- January 25, 1982 Human Rights Commission r~ It is recommended that four appointments be made to this conunission. 1'he Human Rights Comrission is requesting that the city council replace two members of the conunission, Don Cavitt whose term expires in May, 1982; and Dawn Nilsen, whose term expires in May, 1984, since their schedules have not permitted them to attend more than one or two meetings since their ori~i- nal appointment. There are also two vacancies on the commission due to resignations. No students have applied as of-this time. The appointments are as follows: One appointment must be a high school student for a one-year term expiring in May, 1983; three appointments for--three-year terms expiring in May, 1982; May, 1983; and May, 1984. The council may wish to extend the appointment of the term expiring in May, 1982 to May, 1985 rather than considering this appointment again in May, 1982. Park and Recreation Advisory^Commission The terms of three members will expire in February, 1982. Two of the incumbents, Joanne Wilmes and David Dunham, wish to be considered for reappointment. Planning Commission, The terms of three members expire in January, 1982. All • three incumbents, Mary Ahlquist, Joseph Ertman, and Richard Blevins wish to be considered for reappointment. Ahlquist and Ertman have served two terms on the commission, Blevins has served one three-year term. Senior Citizens/Handicapped Commission Four appointments need to be made. Three are for three-year terms expiring in February, 1985, and one is for the unexpired term of Peter Heinrich, who has moved out of the city. This term ex- pires in February, 1984. Two incumbents, Marla Carlson and Frank Andersen wish to be considered for reappointment. South Hennepin Human Services Council One director position to be filled for a two-year will expire in January, 1984. Norris Olson has served citizen representative to this council for the past few Respectfully submitted, ~~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager cc: Program Directors term which as the years. KN/eja BOARD AND COMP•IISSION APPOINTMENTS Advisory Board of Health Appointed: Term Ex Tres ~, - *David Johnson 1. _ ± 84 1 John Landers (4)** " ~ ~ 1-84 *Lia Ozols 2 _ ~ ~- Henry Patzke' ' * 3 L! ~, `~-~=~~' 1-84 Stu Swanson . Civil Service Commission Barry Bloomgren (3)** D1ark Erspamer George Evans 1 . ~ ~'' ~ - ~_P~ ~:-r! ht .e L-85 George Karnas' Charles Kauth John Landers (6)** Henry Patzke Russ Schuveiller Eugene Stelman (2)** Robert Tripanier Enerq y Awareness Commission Janet Erickson 1 • ~t~! ,- `• ~ ~~ `~--'' 7-85 Henry Patzke 2 -~ ~-~~ c~ STU ~-`~- 7-85 Bruce Stone- . _ David LJold 4. ~~~~~ vn~t~ 7-85 5 . 1 ' ~~ `.-; ~- ~ 7 - 8 5 6. ~ - ~ -_ ., 7-85 7, 7-85 Human Rights Commission Thomas Hanson" 1. 5-83 (student John Landers (5)** ~ ' ' -' ~' ^ 5°83 Henry Patzke 2 . - _~ George Seltz -T~, ;'j , , ,, 5-84 4. L;a ~ ~ ,~ * incumbent **preference of commission appointment i i Park and Recreation Advisory Conunission Appointed Term Ex ire Barry Bloomgren -~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-8 Carolyn Dobis 1 . ~~ ~ ~.! ~- ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 5 *David Dunham' ~ ~ James Goebel 2. T~`~ ~•=~~~x ., 2-85 Myrna Hammer G ='~ ' 2- Robert Houlton 3. L^~` ~=~--~~ 85 George Karnas (2)** Charles Kauth (3) ** Barbara Kretzman John Landers (3)** Tim Lindgren (2)** Duff Melhus Ethel Naslund' Henry Patzke Mary Petersen Eugene Stelman (3)**` Robert Tripanier-(2}** *Joanne Wilmes I Planning Commission -- *Niark Ahlquist ` ( ' ' ~ '' `~'~ ~'~ - Allan Anderson 1 . '- ~ 2 85 *Richard Blevins ** y L • ~ ~-85 Barry Bloomgren (2) 2. ~<< < r~~ - ., ~. *Joseph Ertman George Evans (2) ** 3 , " ~-1 ~-~ ~ ~< dry _ `c_ _~ ,. 2-85 Diane Healey George Karnas Charles Kauth (2)** ~~ Barbara Kretzman F~., John Landers ,~~~`~,~ ~ ~' C ` T im Lindgren ' am ,{ Vern Luettinger , Henry Patzke Eugene Stelman Senior Citizens/Handica wed Commission *Frank Andersen ~~ ~ ~\,~ _ ~, ~ti~~nso~ *Marla Carlson . Carolyn Dobis (2)** 2 ' ~~ ` ' `~ ~ ~~ Leonard Glock John Landers 3 • --~ '~~ ~~ "^ ~ ~ `='-_ Henry Patzke Marie Richardson` 1 Dale Rusk 4. (' t~l~c~~ !-I~n~~.~~~ South Hennepin Human Services Council 2-85 2-85 2-85 2-84 i-84 /~ 5 /= CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield .Council Members: Council Letter No. 33 Agenda January 25, 1982 Subject: Transfer of Monies Revolving Fund from Permanent Improvement The 1981 Capital Improvement Budget appropriated $300,000 from the city's Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund (PIR) for the Public Safety Building improvement project. The city code provides that monies in these PIR funds in a total amount not to exceed $300,000 may be transferred to the Capital Improvement budget of the city, by resolution of the city council, to provide funds for the acquisition and betterment of public safety facil- ities of the city. However, these funds were not transferred during 1981 because they were not yet needed. for the project. Attached to this council letter is a resolution which • provides for transfer of $200,000 from the PIR fund to the Public Safety Building project, CP 767. It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached resolution, appropriating the funds. The remaining $100,000 will be appropriated after the PIR is ~i repaid monies it loaned to the Housinq and Redevelopment Authority. That repayment will occur from proceeds of the bond sale the HRA i plans for later this spring. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: Public Safety Director Administrative Services Director Finance Coordinator • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT B[JDGET TO FINANCE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT C.P. 767. WHEREAS, the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield • provides that for a Permanent Improvement Revolvinq Fund to be used for the purpose of financing local improvements, and WHEREAS, the ordinance states that the proceeds of said fund, in a total amount not to exceed $300,000, may be transferred to the Capital Improvement Budget of the city, by resolution of the city council, to provide funds for the acquisition and better- ment of Public Safety facilities, and WHEREAS, the 191 and 1982 Capital Improvement Budgets of the City of Richfield provide for a Public Safety facility improvement project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by resolution of the city council of the City of Richfield that $200,000 from the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund of the city be transferred to the Capital Improvement Budget of the city for purposes of financing costs related to the Public Safety Building improvement project CP 767. Done at the City of Richfield this 25th day of January, 1982. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk :~,/ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 32 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and iviembers of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Extension of Runway 4-22 The Tletropolitan Airport Commission is presently considering extending Runway 4-22 at the International Airport. The most logical direction for extension would be at the 220 degree, or southwest, end of this runway. An extension in this direction would move the end of the runway closer to both Richfield and Bloomington. As part of this procedure, a sponsor's environmental assess- ment is being prepared as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, Council of Environmental Quality Guidelines, Federal Aviation Administration Orders and the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act of 1973. As a part of the initial environmental assess- ment process, a set of proposed alternatives has been prepared. These proposed alternatives will be presented at a public "open house" which has been scheduled for Thursday, January 28, 1982 at Richfield City Hall. Subsequent to this open house, and three others which are being held in AZinneapolis, St. Paul and Eagen- rlendota Heights, the Airport Commission's consultant will then proceed with the environmental assessment procedure. In that improvements to Runway 4-22 will most likely result in an increased level of citizen concern relative to this proposed construction, the city council may want to take a position on this issue and have that transmitted to the Airport Conur.ission's en- vironmental consultant. A more detailed report of what is being proposed will be presented to the city council at the January 25, 1982 city council meeting. Don Priebe and Marty Kirsch, representatives from Rich- field for MASAC, will be present and may desire to address the city council on this matter. Resp ctfully subrlitted, ~61~ City Manager cc: Community Development Director __ innea _ s _ __ ______ I St. Paul rosstown I --~ r-t ~ Mother L-__ J ~ Lake I ~ 22 I E. 63rd St. ~~ ~\\ L i ~\\ Fort Snelling ~ ~~ .\ I ~\ State Park ~ I ~- ~~ I ~. .~ "ter ~~ i '_~ v - - z - ~/ r; ~ ~ ~ I \ 1 ~---I ~ y \`~ L J ~~~ , I y I ~ ~ ~ ~/ J ` i E. fi9th St. ~=~= - \I I 4:,,,~, r------~\ ~ I Richfield ~ Golf I U•S• ~ - ' S I course j National ~ ~ T -- ~ I (Cemetery \~~ ~ `~' ~ ;The expansion I ~`~ ~' I ~~ of Runway 4-22 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ at Minneapolis- ~ St. Paul Airport ~ I~ I 494 ~ ~ ~ Bloomington n~ I~ :~ ~~ CITY OF RICiiFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of C ity P~ianager Council Letter No. 31 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and A7embers of the City Council City of Richf field Council Members: Subject: Legislative Policy - Liquor Licenses Council I~lember Bunce has requested an item be placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda to consider a legis- lative policy which would allow for the issuance of liquor licenses to recreational facilities. (i.e. bowling alleys). The City of Richfield is currently governed by state law re- lating to the issuance of liquor licenses in our community. The specific section of the state law which applies to us is chapter 340.353 which is a provision of the law relating to cities which own municipal liquor stores. Subdivision 5 of that chapter indicates that "not withstanding any provision of this chapter which may indicate the contrary, any city owning and operating a municipal liquor store on the effect- ive date of this act may at the discretion of the governing body issue "on-sale" liquor licenses to private persons for the operation of liquor stores in conjunction with any estab- lishment defined in Section 340.07 as a hotel or restaurant and the requirements of those definitions relating to seating capacity and the number of guest rooms shall apply for purposes of this section." This provision gives the city the right to issue liquor licenses to hotels or restaurants, but to no other facilities. Apparently, other cities in the state are empowered to issue liquor licenses to recreational facilities. It would ta]ce special legislation to allow the City of Richfield to issue recreational liquor licenses. In the event the city council is interested in allowing for liquor licenses to recreational facilities, it should make a position statement in favor of that matter and we will transmit that information to the state legislators. cc: Public Safety Director KN/eja Karl Nollenberger City Manager Respectfully submitted, J CITY OF RICHFIELD LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT SUBJECT: InTine Sales in Grocery Stores The purpose of this statement is to express the City of - Richfield's opposition to the sale of wine in grocery stores. Current Policy State 'law presently prohibits the sale of any alcoholic beverages stronger than beer in establishments other than licensed liquor establishments. The liquor licensing requirements of the law provide a municipality the ability to regulate the availabil- ity and nature of sales of alcoholic beverages within their com- munities. However, legislation has been developed which is likely to be before the state legislature during the 1981 session which would exempt wine sales in grocery stores from the licensing and liquor sale regulations of municipalities. Impact on the City of Richfield The City of Richfield presently owns and operates three off- sale liquor retail establishments. A significant portion of our liquor sales are wine sales. The authorization for grocery stores to sell wine would have a major potential detrimental impact on the city's liquor revenues, which are the major source of funding for capital improvements within the community. Furthermore, exemption of grocery store wine sales from the fairly stringent liquor licensing requirements now contained in state law could present additional opportunity for abuses in liquor sales which would be beyond the ability of the city to control. The City of Richfield wishes to go on record in opposition to authorization of wine sales in grocery stores. Adopted by the Richfield City Council March 9, 1981 w CITY OF RICHFIELD LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENT SUBJECT: Wine Sales in Grocery Stores The purpose of this statement is to express the City of Richfield's opposition to the sale of wine in grocery stores. Current Policy State law presently prohibits the sale of any alcoholic beverages stronger than beer in establishments other than licensed liquor establishments. The liquor licensing requirements of the law provide a municipality the ability to regulate the availabil- ity and nature of sales of alcoholic beverages within their com- munities. However, legislation has been developed which is likely to be before the state legislature during the 1981 session which would exempt wine sales in grocery stores from the licensing and liquor sale regulations of municipalities. Impact on the City of Richfield The City of Richfield presently owns and operates three off- sale liquor retail establishments. A significant portion of our liquor sales are wine sales. The authorization for grocery stores to sell wine would have a major potential detrimental impact on the city's liquor revenues, which are the major source of funding for capital improvements within the community. Furthermore, exemption of grocery store wine sales from the fairly stringent liquor licensing requirements now contained in state law could present additional opportunity for abuses in liquor sales which would be beyond the ability of the city to control. The City of Richfield wishes to go on record in opposition to authorization of wine sales in grocery stores. Adopted by the Richfield City Council March 9, 1981 LEGISLATIVE POSITTODI STATEMENT INTEREST RATE CEILING ON GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS The purpose of this statement is to express the City of M Richfield's opposition to the interest rate ceiling imposed on General Obligation Bonds. Current Policy State law presently prohibits a municipality from paying an interest rate in excess of 12 percent on General Obligation Bonds. This interest rate ceiling, established in 1981, expires during 1982. If legislation amending this interest rate ceiling is not adopted, the ceiling reverts to nine percent. Impact on the City of Richfield The City of Richfield in December, 1981, sought a public sale of $2.450 million in general obligation/tax increment bonds. The city received expressions of interest from two large syndicate bidders who wished to purchase the bonds but could not do so at an interest rate of less than 12 percent. Current bond market conditions are such that the interest rate on long term securities (i.e., of 15 to 20 years duration) has exceeded 12 percent for approximately two months, with no downward trend in sight. The inability of the City of Richfield to market its bonds, when the city has an excellent AA bond rating, is due entirely to the arbitrary interest rate ceiling imposed by state law. The City of Richfield supports elimination of the interest rate ceiling. If the legislature wishes to retain a ceiling on interest rates, it is recommended that the ceiling be established in such a way that it reflects changing market conditions. :~`- /~Z, CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 30 Agenda January 25,1982 The Honorable Mayor and riembers of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members:. Subject: Charter Commission Appointments The Richfield Charter Commission consists of 15 indiv- iduals appointed by the Chief Judge of the District Court for four-year terms in office. In February, 1982, six indiv- iduals will have terms expiring on the Charter Commission. They are as follows: Gordon Anderson George Seltz ~ John Hamilton (resigned effective 12-31) John Landers ~ ~' - ~ - ~~-~L Donna Peterson / ~a~~•<,_ ~ `~a~y Jeanne Juen ~~~~ c~~~~~s The statutes of the State of Minnesota indicate that "a city council, the charter commission, or the petitioners re- questing the appointment of a charter commission may submit to the court the names of eligible nominees which the District Court may consider in making appointments to the charter commission." The city council may desire to utilize that statutory provision and mal{e suggestions to the Chief Judge of the District Court for charter commission appointments. In the event you do so, I have listed an item on the January 25, 1982 city council meeting for your discussion of this matter. Respectfully submitted, 1 ~ Karl Nollenberger City rlanager cc: City Attorney CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 29 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: .. Subject: Resolution Relating to Taxicab Driver License Fees In our review of the newly adopted fee and permit schedule, we recently discovered an error in Appendix D of the ordinance code relating to license fees. In 1977, when various permit and license fees were all incorporated into Appendix D of the ordinance code, a typographical error was made in the rate for taxicab driver's license fees. The fee listed in Appendix D is $50.00 instead of $5.00. When the city council approved by resolution the fees and charges for 1982 in November of 1981, the license fee for taxicab drivers was again incorrectly listed • as $50.00. Although the actual fee charged for taxicab drivers in the past has been $5.00, it is necessary to amend the resolu- tion to include the correct license rate. It is the opinion of the Public Safety Director, in which I concur, that this license fee should be $15.00 per year. The average taxicab licensing fee charged by other area municipalities is $12.25. However, the City of Richfield does a much more intensive investigation of the taxicab drivers, so that a license of $15.00 is justified. Attached to this council letter is a resolution amending the license fee for taxicab driver to $15.00 per year. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City i~tanager KN/sh cc: City Clerk Public Safety Director r. RESOLUUION X10. RESOLUTIO[~I AMENDING A SECTION OF • RESOLUTION NO. 6537 RELATING TO TAXICAB DRIVERS LICENSES U BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota as follows: Section 1. Establishing Fees; Table of Cross references. License, permit and miscellaneous fees requires under the ordinance of the City of Richfield shall be as contained in the following section of this resolution. The following table cross references the sections and subdivisions of the ordinance code to the sections and paragraph numbers of this resolution. Ordinance Code This Resolution Section Subdivision Section Number 6.21 6 6 9 Section 6. TYPE OF PERMIT OR LICENSE Vehicle and Transportation License and Permit Fees. SECTION REQUIRING TOTAL VALUATION FEE SCHEDULE FEE (9) Taxicab Driver 1 year $15.00 6.21 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this 25th day of January, 1982. John Hamilton Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk ~ ~~~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager ~ • Council Letter No. 28 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Taxicab Business License, Suburban Yellow Cab Company On December 10, 1981, the city received the license renewal application from Suburban Yellow Cab Company to license the 50 taxi vehicles which the company operates in the City of Richfield. The fee submitted with the renewal application was based on the 1981 license fee rather than the 1982 rates recently adopted by the city council. Therefore, the Public Safety Director contacted the firm requesting the balance of the license fee prior to action by the city council on the license renewal request. • The balance of the 1982 license fee has been submitted on behalf of the applicant. The total fees paid by the applicant, based on the 1982 license fee rate for the 50 taxicab vehicles for which licensure is requested, is in the amount of $1,325. The Public Safety Department has conducted the required inspection of these vehicles and the applicant has submitted the required insurance certificate. It is, therefore, recommended that the license application from Suburban Yellow Cab Company be approved and the licenses issued. Respectfully submitted, / , C~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: Public Safety Director ~,~ / ..-~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager Council Letter No. 27 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Length of Council Terms Referral to Charter Commission Mayor Hamilton and Council Member Bunce have requested that the city council consider requesting the charter commission to review the charter provisions relating to the length of term for the Mayor and council members in the city. This item has been placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda for discussion purposes of the city council. The city council can either refer a specific proposal to the charter commission or ask the commission to study the issue i ~ generally and derive their own charter amendment if they desire to do so. Resp ctfully submitted, z ~~~J ~~ ~~ Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/eja CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 26 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Status Report, Tip-Top Car Wash A discussion item has been placed on the January 25, 1982 city council agenda to review the current status of litigation involving the business license of the Tip Top Car Wash, 6601 Bloomington Avenue South. As members of the council ?nay recall, there have been problems regarding the operation of this car wash establishment for more than two years. Initially, this matter came before the city council in 1980, when the owner neglected to obtain the required business license for his establishment. Following enforcement action against the owner by the Public Safety Department for operating his business with- out a license, the owner applied for a license and the council held a public hearing on that application. During the hearing, a large number of residents in the neighborhood surrounding the car wash business appeared and offered testimony about operational problems at the establishment which had resulted in a community nuisance problem. Additionally, the Public Safety Department supported the testimony of the residents by introducing a number of formal complaints which had been received, as well as formal actions taken against the owner to force his operation into compliance with applicable city ordinance codes which were, at the time, being violated. As a result of the hearing process for the 1980 business license, the owner stipulated before the city council that corrective action would be taken to resolve the problems which had been presented at the license renewal hearing. On this basis, the council renewed the 1980 business license for the car wash. At the time the application for the 1981 business license was brought before the council, another public hearing was held to evaluate the progress made by the applicant with with regard to operational deficiencies which had created a nuisance in the neighborhood. Again, at this hearing, a number of residents in the area immediately surrounding the car wash appeared and offered testimony to indicate that many of the original problems still existed. The Public Safety Department introduced testimony indicating that several of the original problems had been corrected, but a number of problems continued to exist. On March 9, 1981, the council adopted a formal Findings of Fact which indicated that the car wash business continued to be oper- ated in a manner which was not in complete compliance with the ordinance code provisions affecting this type of business establishment. In consideration of these Findings of Fact, and Council Letter No. 26 -2- January 25, 1982 in consideration of the problems described at the 1980 license renewal hearing, which apparently continued to exist, the • council denied the applicant's request for a license renewal for the 198J_ license year. Additionally, the council ordered that the business cease and discontinue all activities for which licensure is required by July 1, 1981. Following this action by the city council, the applicant obtained a temporary injunction restraining the city from enforcing the July 1 closing until such time as the matter could be considered fully at trial. Because of congested court schedules the matter relating to the 1981 business license is just now coming up for trial. The .jury assignment was originally scheduled for January 11, but because of continued congestion in the court schedule this has again been temporarily delayed. However, the attorney for the defendant did request a pre-trial meeting with the Public Safety Director and the City Attorney on January 11. At that meeting, the attorney for the defendant discussed the potential for having the city grant a conditional business license for the 1982 bus- iness year. The conditional license would formally stipulate, within the license document itself, the areas in which operational deficiencies exist and the action required by the council to correct these matters. In the opinion of the Public Safety Director and the Assistant City Attorney, this proposal appears to be worthy of consideration since the outcome of the trial is, at this point, somewhat moot because the temporary injunction allowed the business to continue to operate through the 1981 license year. Any decision arrived at through the trial process would, from a practical point of view, be meaningless since there is nothing for the city to recover with regard to the original license denial action. Additionally, regardless of the outcome of the trial, there would be no impact on the required council consideration for the 1982 business license. That is to say that, in the event the city should be sustained in denial of the 1981 business license, such decision could not be used in determining action relative to the pending 1982 business license application. The final, and perhaps the most important reason, the council may wish to discuss this matter relates to the present status of the operation of this business in our community. Earlier this month the City Attorney's office conducted pre- trial interviews with a number of the residents in the area of the business establishment. On the basis of these interviews, as well as the observations of the Public Safety Department, many of the original difficulties seem to have been resolved by the owner. While the fact remains that the site upon which the business exists may not be compatible with the residential character of the surrounding neighborhood, the neighborhood nuisance problems created by the business have been greatly modified. In some respects a conditional license would give the city more control over the business operation than success- ful litigation of the 1981 business license denial. __ _ _ Council Letter No. 26 -3- January 25, 1982 Since the litigation in this matter is the result of a council direction to the staff, and since the council action • was taken some ten months ago, it is recommended that this matter be considered and discussed by the council in view of the existing circumstances. Respectfully submitted, ~ I ~~. Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh ._ cc: Public Safety Director City Attorney City Clerk ~..J rr; /~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 25 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: __ Subject: Non-Intoxicating Malt Beverage License, Academy of the Holy Angels The Boosters Club of the Academy of the Holy Angels is planning a fund raising dinner activity for Saturday, January 30, 1982. The fund raiser will be held at the school fram 9:00 p.m. to 12:00 midnight. This is an annual event, with the proceeds received used to finance school athletics and recreation programs. Therefore, all proceeds are turned over to the Academy of the Holy Angels. The school has submitted an application, on behalf of their Booster Club, to permit the sale of non-intoxicating • malt beverages during the three hours that their fund raising activity will be in progress. Since all of the activity proceeds will be returned to the school, they have requested that this license be issued on a non-fee basis. The Public Safety Department has conducted the necessary background investigation with regard to the license application and finds no basis upon which to deny the application, Respectfully submitted, ''JJ "' ~ c Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: Public Safety Director CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: /~~~ Council Letter No. 24 Agenda January 25, 1982 Subject: Resolution Setting Public Hearing for Issuance of Industrial Development Revenue (IDR) Bonds For Derrick Development Corp. Derrick Development Corporation has. requested that the city council set a public hearing for February 16, 1982 for the pur- pose of authorizing the issuance of Industrial Development Rev- enue Bonds for the development of the Godfather Block, which is that block bounded by 65th Street, Lyndale Avenue, 66th Street and Graham Avenue. • It is anticipated that there will be a concurrent HRA and City Council meeting at the regular HRA meeting time on February 16, when the bodies will be presented with a proposal from the Derrick Land Company. The project envisions mixed use develop- ment containing about 50,000 square feet of office space, 75,000 square feet of commercial space, 288 condominium units, and structured parking. The tax exempt financing would be utilized for the commercial and office portion of the project. In that action by Congress on IDR legislation is unknown at this time, it appears prudent for the city council to authorize the issuance of these bonds if_ they deem the project to be worth- while. A delay in the authorization of IDR bonds for this type of project may be precluded by congressional action this year; the importance of timely action on this matter cannot be over- emphasized. Therefore, it is recommended that the council establish Feb- ruary 16, 1982 as the date for a public hearing on this matter. Respectfully submitted, 4 I Karl Nollenberger City 1~Ianager • cc: Conununity Development Director Administrative Services Director Housing and Redevelopment Coordinator Finance Coordinator RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED PROJECT UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT WHEREAS, representative of New Age Developers, a Minnesota partnership to be formed (the_ "Company") has proposed that the City undertake and finance a project under the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 (the "Act"); and - WHEREAS, the Act, as~ame-nded, requires that a public hearing on the proposed project be conducted by the Council before any action may be taken by it relative to the proposed project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the. City Council of the City of Richfield: ? ; 3~ 1. The Council shall meet at 7-~T p.m. on Tuesday, February 16, 1982 to conduct a public hearing on the proposed .project requested by the Company and to take whatever action in relation thereto as it deems appropriate. 2. The City Clerk is aut notice of the hearing Exhibit A once in the the Minneapolis Star, in the City, not less 16, 1982. Zorized and directed to publish in the form attached hereto as official newspaper and once in a newspaper of general circulation than 15 days prior to February Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 25th day of January, 1982. John Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. .Bergh, City Clerk Exhibit A NOTICE OF" PUBLIC HEARING ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota will meet in the~ouncil chambers in the City ^~° Hall in the City of Richfield at_~-8'~ p.m. on Tuesday February 16, n~ 1982, to conduct a public~hearng on a proposal that the City. under- take and finance a project under the Municipal Industrial Develop- ment Act, Minnesota Statutes,: Chapter 474. The project is proposed by New Age Developers, a,Minnesota partnership (the "Company.") and consists of the acquisition and improvement of land in the City and the construction and equipping thereon of approximately 125,,000 square feet of commercial office and retail facilities and related parking facilities. The principal amount of bonds or other obligations proposed to be issued by the City to finance the project is estimated to be not in excess. of $9,850,000. A draft copy of a proposed application to the. Minnesota Department of~Planning, Energy-and Development, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspec- tion at the office of the City Clerk in the City Hall, City of Richfield, Minnesota during regular City business hours (8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. daily, except Saturdays, Sundays and holidays). Any person wishing to express a view with respect to the proposal. to undertake and finance the project will be heard at the public hearing. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Sylvia K. Bergh City Clerk Dated: January 25, 198.2 l ~ -f`~ CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager • Council Letter No. 23 Agenda January 25, 1982 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Richfield Council Members: Subject: Purchases in Excess of $1,000 Chapter Six, Section 6.05 of the city charter stipulates that the city council must approve the purchase of merchandise, materials, equipment or construction when the amount exceeds 51,000. There are four such items on the cCuncil agenda of January 25, 1982. CUTTING EDGES It is necessary periodically to replace and provide inventory of cutting edges used for the large snow plow graders. Hennepin County took bids on this item and under the joint purchase agree- ment, Richfield is able to order from their contract. It is recommended that the city authorize the purchase of 20 cutting edges for a total purchase price of $1,653.18 from Ziegler, Inc. []~~TER METER There is a need for a four-inch Rockwell sina_le register compound water meter with flanges to be installed as part of the utility preparation for the multi-unit housing in the vicinity of 66th Street and Lake Shore Drive. As this is not a typical meter kept in the water utility inventory, it is requested that the city council authorize the purchase at this time so that the equipment can be available when needed during the construction. Two quotations were received. [tiTater Products Company quoted $1,470. It is recommended that the city council authorize the purchase of the water meter from Davies Water Equipment in the amount of $1,438. BROCHURE PAPER Each year, the city and the school district cooperate in the publication and distribution of four brochures. These brochures include information on community education programs, city par}c and recreation areas and facilities as well as a Newsletter portion of general interest to the community. Copy has now been submitted for the spring issue which is proposed for distribution the first part of March. Three quotations were received for the 136,500 sheets of paper needed. Butler Paper quoted $1,977.88 based on $14.49/M. Anchor Paper quoted $1,956.05 based on $14.33/M. It is recommended that the city council authorize the purchase from Wilcox Paper Company in the amount of $1,904.17 based on $13.95/M. Council Letter No. 23 -2- January 25, 1982 L/H/N SPARE STREET LIGHT PLIRCHASE The electrical contractor on the Lyndale Avenue (CP 7052) project ordered two more light poles and fixtures than were required for completion of the project. The L/H/N contracts did not require that spare replacement poles be provided as part of the contract, although such a stipulation was part of the permanent street paving program and the county road lighting " project. In 1980, the city lost two poles in the L/H/N due to~ vehicular damage. These lights are a "special order," which require six to eight weeks for delivery. 'I~he staff believes that it would be to the city's advantage to purchase these two ':.extra" lights from the contractor, as part of CP 7052, and use them for future replacements. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council approve thr~ purchase of two 400W high pressure sodium lights with square tapered poles from Collins Electric for $1,696.25 each, in the total amount of $3,392.50. Respectfully submitted, Karl Nollenberger City Manager KN/sh cc: f~ommunity Development Director City Engineer Community Services Director •