08-25-80 agenda~yN
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of C ity Manager
Council Letter No. 309
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the' City Council
City of Richf field ,
Council Members:
Subject: Award of Contracts for Street and Storm
Sewer Construction at the Coach Home Site
As part of the developer's agreement between the City and
Duraps, Inc..., developers of the Woodlake School site, the city
agreed to make street improvements adjacent to the site as part
of City Project 705. Included in this work is:
1. Curb cuts on 66th Street with a bituminous driveway
connection to the existing parking lot;
2. Curb cut and two driveways off of Rae Drive;
3. Catch basin on existing storm sewer line at Emerson
Avenue;
4. Storm sewer outfall from the northeasterly property
line of the site;
5. Construct catch basins, storm sewer, and outfall from
Rae Drive cul-de-sac.
The work was divided into two contracts; street work (1 and 2)
and plans and specifications prepared. Quotations for this work
were solicited and received in accordance with legal requirements
as follows
Street Contract:
Bituminous Roadways $ 8,158.18
Brown & Cris, Inc. $10,833.60
Storm Sewer Contract:
Brown & Cris, Inc. 8,565.00
Erickson Const., Inc. 8,817.10
It is recommended that the city council award the contract
for the street work to Bituminous Roadways, Inc., the low bidder
ire the amount of $8,158.18, and that the storm sewer contract be
awarded to Brown & Cris, Inc. in the amount of $8,565.00.
Resp ctfully submitted,
~Q.1~o C~~~-,~-~~`'~
Kaf 1 Nollenberger
City Manager
cc: Community Development Director
iy ~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 308
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Minutes, Tabulation of Bids and Award of
Contract for Repair and Overlaying City Hall,
Ice Arena, and water Plant Parking Lots
Resurfacing of the parking lots at city hall, the ice arena,
and the water plant is part of the 1980 Capital Improvements Program.
The city hall and ice arena parking lot improvements will use special
revenue funds. The water plant parking lot will use water revenues.
Specifications for the work were prepared, advertisements issued and
bids opened on August 21, 1980 in accordance with legal requirements.
A copy of the bid minutes and tabulations are attached for council
review.
It is recommended that the city council award the contract
for the overlay project to the low responsible bidder, Barber Con-
struction Co. of D~innetonka, in the amount of $41,101.80.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
,~~ ~~
Karl Nollenber er
City Manager
KN/jt
cc: Community Services Director
~n r~ /~ ~/
~` ~~ ~~ .
?r ~6 ~
~ J<
~~ V,
O~ ~ ~ \j'
.~~~"~
i
f
CITY OF RICHFIELD
Bid Opening
August 21, 1980
Bituminous Overlay Construction
Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative
Staff was called by Joyce Wilde, Acting City Manager, who announced that the
purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud, sealed bids for the
Bituminous Overlay Construction as advertised in the official newspaper on
August 13, 1980.
Present: Joyce L. Wilde, Acting City Manager
Arthur Bailey, Engineer
Michael Eastling, Engineer
Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director
Don Fondrick, Community Services Director
Sylvia Bergh, Acting City Clerk
The following bids were submitted and read aloud:
BIDDER BID SECURITY AMOUNT
United Asphalt Co. 5% B, B. $49,919.75
Bituminous Roadways 5% B. B. 51,029.86
Prior Lake Blacktop, Inc. 5% B. B, 59,859.57
Minnesota Valley Surfacing 5% B. B. 65,451.50
Northwest Asphalt 5% B, B. 53,195.15
Munn Blacktop, Inc. 5% B. B, ~ 46,204.50
Asphalt Paving Materials, -Inc. 5% B. 8. 48,748.05
Barber Construction Co. 5% B, B. 41,101.80
The Acting City Manager announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered
at the regular city council meeting of August 25, 1980.
Sylvia K. Bergh Acting City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
#. ~
Council Letter No. •307
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject:
Council
Request for Re-consideration of Ordinance
Amendment Relating to Punch Presses
ment which would increase the allowable rated capacity of punch
press machinery within an industrial zoning district. This re-
quest has been amde by Mr. A. J. Z.imen, on behalf of Cedar In-
dustries, Inc. The effect of such an ordinance amendment would
be to permit Cedar Industries to continue their existing operations
at 6311 Cedar Avenue in conformance with the amended city ordin-
ance.
As council members are aware,
ating at their present address for
the present code limitations on the
machinery. Although the city counc
ance amendment earlier this year, a
requested an opportunity to address
of his client.
Cedar Industries has been oper-
many years, in violation of
permitted size of punch press
jected i
At the February 11, 1980 city council meeting, the council
directed the city attorney's office to proceed with prosecution
against Cedar Industries with regard to their non-conformance to
our ordinance code restriction on the permitted size of punch
press equipment. On March 27, 1980, a formal criminal complaint
was issued against Cedar Industries. This matter has now been
scheduled for trial in Hennepin County Municipal Court on Septem-
ber 3, 1980. Because of this pending litigation another public
discussion of this matter may not be appropriate. However, the
council may receive whatever testimony Mr. Zlimen may wish to offer.
Unless the council wishes to re-consider their previous action
in this matter, the city attorney's office is prepared to continue
with their scheduled litigation.
Respectfully submitted,
~D
K rl Nollenberger
cc: City Attorney City Manager
~ /~
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. 306
Agenda August 25 1980
Subject: Energy Awareness Commission - Street Lighting
and Stop Sign Recommendations
At the July 29, 1980 meeting of the Energy Awareness Commission,
the commission continued their review of the advantages of low pres-
sure sodium lighting. Jim Lewis of Norelco gave a presentation con-
cerning low pressure sodium tests in other cities, advantages and
disadvantages of this lighting, and the energy and dollar savings
that can be realized. The installation of low pressure sodium light-
ing in Richfield would reduce the energy used for street lighting by
60 per cent. The dollar savings would be substantial and would in-
crease as energy rates increase. (Northern States Power has just
requested a 12.66 per cent increase in rates.) The main opposition
to low pressure sodium lighting has been the yellow hue of the light
and the distortion of colors that occurs in the absence of other light
sources..
The Energy Awareness Commission felt that
dence of substantial advantages to low pressure
warrant the creation of a test area in the City
1965, the southern portion of Lyndale Avenue wa
per
for that area.
watts
t low
The Lyndale Avenue, 74th Street-78th Street, test site is cur-
rently serviced by 26 fluorescent 640-watt units. The Lyndale site was
selected for three reasons:
1) the high degree of energy savings per dollar invested;
2) the potential for a great deal of public contact in this
area; and
3) The conversion of these 26 units to .low pressure sodium
lighting would yield an energy savings of $1,766 per
year (at the August 1, 1900 rate).
there is enough evi-
sodium lighting to
of Richfield. In
Council Letter NO. 306 -2- August 25, 1980
Lyndale Avenue is a major arterial through Richfield and the
test site is a commercial area that merges into a higher density,
multiple-residential area. Thus, due to the traffic generation of
the test site, a large amount of public contact can be realized,
both for public awareness of energy conservation, and public response
to the yellow color of low pressure sodium lighting.
The costs of this test conversion would be $230 per lamp unit
for each of the 26, 135-watt low pressure sodium units, for a total
of $5,980. These prices are for materials only; the city would fur-
nish the labor for the installation and maintenance, and evaluation
processes. This price is quoted from Norelco for the materials on a
test agreement in which Norelco would supply lamp units to the city
for evaluation purposes, on a small scale, at a reduced cost. The
payback period on this $5,980 expenditure with a $1,766 yearly savings
would be 3.4 years (at current energy rates).
This type of lighting has been used extensively throughout Europe
for many years, has recently keen retrofitted on a large scale in
California, and is considered by the Energy Awareness Commission as
a cost saving alternative for the city. The Energy Awareness Commis-
sion has referred the attached resolution the the city council with
the recommendation that the council authorize installation of the low
pressure sodium lighting in the described test area. Funds to support
this test program can be derived from the $100,000 capital improvement
program appropriation for building and energy improvements.
authorize the staff to
dium lighting in the test
In addition, we received
d prize in an energy -~
a
J. Claffee, "Running Costs of Motor Vehicles as Affected by Road
Design and Traffic", National Cooperative Highway. Research Program
Report #111, Highway Research Board, 1971.) the author computed, from
direct me~_surements, that the excess gasoline needed by a typical
vehicle to decelerate from 30 mph is .0097 gallons. The gasoline
measurements were performed on mid-1960's vehicles. While typical
gasoline mileage has probably changed with the decreased demands of
smaller engines and the increased demands of pollution control equip-
ment, more recent figures are not available. Using that estimate and
I would recommend that the city council
implement the installation of low pressure so
area as recommended by the Energy Commission.
Council Letter No. 306 -3-
August 25, 1980
based on current traffic volumes, eliminating three stop signs on
76th Street would result in a savings of about 350 gallons per day,
or about 125,000 gallons per year. Removing two stop signs at 9
other four-way stop intersections would result in a savings of 285
gallons a day, or more than 100,000 gallons per year.
The staff recommended to the commission that excess energy con-
sumption generated by inappropriate signing should be considered as
a criteria for any decision concerning stop sign requests. The Energy
Awareness Conunission has referred the attached resolution to the city
council as a recommendation directed toward energy conservation.
Respectfully submitted,
~J
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/jf
cc: Community Development Director
Community Services Director
City Engineer
A~.aintenance Superintendent
Technical Operations Superintendent
RESOLUTION NO. 1
ENERGY AjYARENESS CON~fISSION
STREET LIGHTING RECOMMENDATION
WHEREAS, the Energy Awareness Commission promotes a citywide
energy reduction; and
WHEREAS, low pressure sodium street lights provide a definite
energy and dollar savings;
BE IT RESOLVED, THEREFORE, by this Energy Awareness Commission
of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
That a low pressure sodium street lighting test area be
installed in the City of Richfield, and
That priority be given to areas which presently have
flourescent street lights, such as Lyndale Avenue, south of
74th Street.
~ Passed by the Energy Awareness Commission of the City of
Richfield, Minnesota, this 29th day of July, 1980.
Dennis Louis, Chairperson
John D1oon, Secretary
RESOLUTION NO. 2
ENERGY AtiVARENESS CON1b1ISSI0N
STOP SIGN RECOMMENDATION
WHEREAS, the Energy Awareness Commission has as one of its
objectives to promote energy conservation and inform the public
on energy issues;
BE IT RESOLVED, THEREFORE, by this Energy Awareness
Commission of Richfield, Minnesota, as follows:
That the city council strongly consider the extra vehicular
energy consumption that is generated by the installation of
stop signs.
Passed by the Energy Awareness Commission of the
City of Richfield, Minnesota, this 29th day of July, 1980.
Dennis Louis, Chairperson
John Moon, Secretary
~y
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 305
Agenda August 25,1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Hearing on Special Assessments for CP 705
vance notice and publication requirements for a special assess-
ment project will be met, as required by state law. All affected
August 25, 1980, as was described in the original hearing notice
mailed to each property owner, in case some of those individuals
do not receive the notice of the hearing date change, and appear
on August 25, 1980 wishing to be heard.
For this reason, it is recommended that the c
open the hearing on special assessment for CP 705
25, 1980 city council meeting. After receiving an
mony which might be offered at that time, it would
Respectfully submitted,
~o
K rl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
ounc it
public testi-
cc: Community Development Director
Deputy City Clerk
~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 304
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield .
Council Members:
Subject: Request for Approval of Off-Street Parking
Permit, Lyndale Hardware
Mr. John Sief, representing S & M Corporation, prospective
owner of the property at 6616 Lyndale Avenue, has submitted an
lot improvements. The staff has reviewed the proposed parking lot
plans and found that the proposed improvements would meet all city
parking lot standards and guidelines, with the exception of the
following:
1.
to
be provided on the site. It is the
that because the proposal maximizes
available on the site, provides one
existing number, and because of the
of the use,. that the number of spac
rking spaces avail-
ned improvements
eliminate 21 of
es indicate that
staf
the
more
The applicant is also considering the
expanding the second story office in
Should this occur, additional spaces
Depending upon the uses in that space
parking could exist on the site.
number of spaces
space than the
turnover rate
2. A drainage plan has not been submitted.
3. Parking stall depths are 18 feet. City guidelines in-
dicate that 20 foot deep stalls should be provided.
The staff eels that due to the trend toward smaller
cars, and because sufficiently wide driving aisles are
provided, that 18 foot parking stall depths would be
sufficient.
possibility of
the building.
would be required.
insufficient
r
Council Letter No. 304 -2-
5.
4. A 15 foot setback between the parking 1~
jacent residential area to the west has
vided. A 9 foot wide landscaped buffer
The staff feels that because of the hea
proposed in the buffer area, the 9 foot
be sufficient.
August 25, 1980
~t and the ad-
not been pro-
area is indicated.
vy landscaping
setback would
right-of-way have not been provided. This has been de-
layed because of the lack of final landscape plans for
the city right-of-way.
d
ing agreement by passing the attached resolution. The follow-
stipulations should be attached to the approval, however:
1. That a final drainage plan be approved by city staff.
2. That final landscape plans for the areas adjacent to
city right-of-way be approved by the city staff;
3.
execu
ed.
is
rk-
ing permit performance bond requirement. The performance bond
required in the developer's agreement would cover the parking lot
improvements and insure that the planned improvements are con-
structed as approved.
Res ectfully submitted,
~D
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
cc: Community Development Director
City Engineer
t
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING LAYOUT AND CONTRACT FOR
OFF-STREET PARKING IN ACCORDANCE WITH
APPLICATION NO. 80-8, CONTRACT NO. 2327
Name: John Sieff
Address: 2101 Kennedy St. NE
Mplw., MN 55413
Location: 6616 Lyndale Ave. S.
Use: Hardware Store, and other commercial uses
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the proposed geometric layout of the off-street parking
as contained in Off-Street Parking Application No. 80-8, Contract
No. 2327 is hereby approved subject to and upon completion of
performance of the contract for such off-street parking as herein-
after authorized.
2. That the proposed off-street parking contract for the
improvement of said off-street parking, bearing contract No. 23.27 be
placed on file and that the manager be authorized to sign said
contract and the clerk be authorized to seal the same for and on
behalf of this city.
3. That the off-street parking operator provide the City of
Richfield with Surety in the form of cash, passbook saving withdrawal
authority, or performance bond in an amount to be determined by the
community development director and city manager, to ensure the off-
street parking lot is constructed within the terms and regulations of
the Off-street Parking Agreement with the following stipulations:
a. That a final drainage plan be approved by city staff.
b. Final landscape plans for the areas adjacent to city right-of-
way be approved by city staff.
c. If building expansion occurs that a revised off-street parking
permit be obtained.
4. That responsibility for the proper upkeep and maintenance of
said Off-Street Parking lot shall remain the responsibility of the
off-street parking lot operator in accordance with Ordinance Code 4.05.
Adopted by the city council of the City of Richfield this 25th
day of August, 1980.
Donald J. Priebe Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh, Acting City Clerk
`~~:-
• ~~
~~
\~~
\~\ ~,~~
---~: ~ ' •
l~l
W
~ II
O is
i
~~!
~~
~' ~
i - - - ~~
'r ~~ti
yy !!~
L ~~
,
a ~hi~ ~,yac~s
~S~C
_ _-- , .~
. ~.
.. ,
~~~ . ~
y
i
- -
~ ice- _ „ ~' I ~~. ~ U~o ~
al '~. ~ 4~~'•
1 ~ m ~-~~ ~~7' - vAI,~C
~ j ~: $ ~ ,~o e .,
i- ~ ~~o
~ ~,.~ I
~. d'`..' ..,-.. ~ a
\ J
^ ~~ F~ \ '~
rc r t
r
1"_-- _ q ~ ,: ~r 'lye.
8 i
h •, ~ yi
g r -- ~ ~
~ ~~
r ~.
N' _ .q
_ _ _.-r' .
oaa~d: :~yC~79 OI y,
~.
O
Jaya,-~r~~
"~
\'\ 1 0
/ 2q\, _
SQ ~~•
-~
i~°~~ ~/
., ~/
~,
~~
q61 C~a.
°~ 3
I `~
~~;
7~-8
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 303
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Lyndale Hardware, Approval of Developer's
Agreement and Related Items Providing for
Property Improvements
The LHN redevelopment project was established in 1975 by the
city council and HRA after several years of planning by staff, resi-
dents, and business people. There was general agreement at that time
that it was necessary for the city government to work with private
businesses to improve the area. The decline of Richfield's prime
commercial area was so severe that redevelopment utilizing the HRA's
ability to assemble land for development by private business has
become a primary activity within the redevelopment area. A second
element of the strategy to reverse the decline was rehabilitation
of existing buildings with governmental assistance from city govern-
ment.
redevelopment plan. The revised plan expanded tYie role of the city
and HRA in encouraging rehabilitation and on-site expansion of
existing businesses. The Lyndale Hardware facility, together with the
adjoining commercial uses on the west side of Lyndale .Avenue south
of 66th Street was one of the areas identified for rehabilitation
in the amended plan.
In response to the LHN redevelopment planning process, the city
within the LHN area. The purpose of these improvements was to
reduce congestion and traffic and pedestrian accidents, and to give
the area a sense of visual unity. To accomplish this project, it
was necessary to obtain control of privately-owned land adjacent to
the roadways to permit street widening and installation of the im-
provements. To accomplish these improvements, it was necessary to
impossible for the existing use
were purchased in 1977 at ,a cos
the easement area takings made it
to continue. Amoco and Betty Crocker
Council Letter N0. 303 -2- August 25, 1980
In the spring of 1979, the staff initiated a series of meetings
with the local representative of the Lyndale Hardware property owners,
Joseph Bard. The owners were encouraged to rehabilitate their prop-
erty. The discussions also dealt with the future of the residual
land (which would not be used for the street improvements) in the Amoco
and Betty Crocker parcels, and the impact of the taking of the Lyn-
dale Avenue easements on the businesses occupying the hardware
building.
The business people along Lyndale Avenue were very concerned
about the. potential 'loss of parking in front of their stores. Thus,
staff attempted to provide as much parking as possible and still
permit the installation of the street improvements. The appraisal
which was done in 1979 established just compensation of $70,000 for
the Bard easements. That figure assumed the continued availability
In the fall of
to sell the property
Sieff, owner of the
s discussed included financ-
compensation for the ease-
The council has already considered some aspects of t'riis proposal.
On July 28, the preliminary plans were presented as a part of the
hearing on Lyndale Hardware's request for council authorization to
issue tax exempt Industrial Revenue Bonds. The hearing was closed,
and the council deferred adoption of a preliminary resolution in sup-
port of the financing until a developer's agreement had been formu-
lated. A tax exempt note, not to exceed $1.5 million, would provide
gation
\~ ~
s o-e
~~a
~~
\;,'~
vehicles and pedestrians and for aes
pis arY-angement is to relocate the m
ie back or west. side of the building
once would become a rear entry.
of the easement areas on 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue,
Jesidual Betty Crocker and Amoco land.
1979, the Bard interests indicated they prof
rather than rehab it. At about this time,
s
Council Letter Nc. 303 -3-
August 25, 1980
~~
a
he staff with an independent ap- ~ ~~
to the property by the taking of
estimated to be at least $~'6 ~-
Approximately two-thirds of this amount is the "cost to cure" for
the loss of parking and the major customer access at the front of the
store. The "cost to cure" includes the costs associated with making
it possible to install a front door on the west side of the property;
site work related to sidewalks, parking lot surfacing, boiler build-
ing removal, and building modifications to both the interior and
exterior. The remaining damages of at least $97,680 include the valuE
of the easement takings and severance damages.
to this appraisal, the staff requested the city's
J. Janski, to reevaluate the damages, giving con-
loss of all parking in front of the stores, which
onsidered in the original appraisal. He concluded
also ordered by the staff. Mr. Janski established a value of $4.60
per square foot on the Amoco property and $3.50 per square foot on the
Pie Shop property. The city is retaining easement rights on both
properties. The portions which may be utilized by the developer
approximate 8,697 square feet at the former Amoco site, with a value
of $40,006. The portion of the Pie Shop property which is developable
contains approximately 9,442 square feet and is valued at $33,047.
As a result of the appraisals and the discussions which ensued,_
the Developer's Agreement states that the city will obtain the 66th
Street and Lyndale easements, and convey the Amoco site and part of
the Pie- Shop site to the developer. To equalize the difference in
the values on this transaction, the city would pay the developer an
additional $75,000. The cash payment is justified to equalize the
values, regardless of whether our appraiser's values or the developer'
appraiser's values are used:
A. City's Appraiser
Value of Hardware easements
Value of Amoco and Pie Shop
Dispositions
f.no Difference
Q / QSr-B. Developer's Appraiser
y~... Value of Hardware easements
~ ~ ``~q'° Value of Amoco and Pie Shop
vl Dispositions
`~ ~ ~ ~ Difference
$220,000 (approximately)
-73,000 (approximately)
$267,945 (approximately)
- 72,556 (approximately)
~ / ~~
0~~ ~ ~
~' ~
'~ Council Letter No. 303 -4- August 25, 1980
These f i
sultants. Si
fessional con-
ovement project, it is appropriate that
e made. It may be done as a part of
• Other proposed provisions of the Developer's Agreement include
the following:
- tax exempt rinancing W111 be autnorizea by the city;
- initiation and completion of the improvements will occur
within 12 months of the execution of the agreement;
- the developer will cooperate in the future vacation of
Circle Place, provided suitable access to his property
is provided;
- all signs will be an integral part of the building in
terms of designs and quality. Billboards will not be
permitted.
- If a structure is built on the Amoco parcel in the future,
it will be in harmony with the existing building;
- the final drawings will conform to the final Preliminary
Plans, which would be similar to the plans presented to
the Council on July 28; and,
- utility lines will be installed underground.
In addition to approval of
several other elements of this
actions. On August 11, the cit
t disposition
y's comprehen
Disposal of city property
tached is a proposed Transitory
this disposition. With council
given first reading approval at
meeting. The public hearing any
be on September 8,•1980..
pan only be done by ordinance. At-
Ordinance which would accomplish
approval, the ordinance would be
the August 25, 1980 city council
3 second reading consideration could
Revenue Bond Act. This financing prop>ides a developer with below
market interest rate financing, with no financial obligation for the
city. With council authorization, the developer can seek state ap-
proval for this financing. Negotiations will then be initiated to
formulate terms of the financing, including the exact amount of the
mortgage, payments, and amortization period.
During the public hearing on the request for tax exempt financing,
the city council was presented with a report which contained the
resolutions and agreements which must be approved to indicate pre-
liminary support for this financing. Thus, only the resolution
the Developer's Agreement, there are
proposal which reciuire formal council
Council Letter No. 303 -5- August 25, 1980
giving preliminary approval to the project has been included with
this council letter. The other documents include the memorandum of
agreement; a statement concerning the project; and the application
to the state Department of Commerce.
ment plan goals and objectives as adopted in Niarch, 1979. It will
provide assistance to a business already located within the project.
a tax increment or approximately ~.~u,uuu by iyzs.~. r~urtner, it re-
turns a portion of the Amoco property to the tax roles. This re-
sidual portion of land, as a freestanding parcel, has very limited
development potential.
It is recommended that the city council approve this proposed
development by taking the following actions:
1. Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into the
Developer's Agreement;
2. Give first reading approval to the transitory ordinance
regarding the disposition of property;
3.
g and authorizing the Mayor and City D~anager
other documents related to this prelimin-
Resp ctfully submitted,
~a
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/jf
to execute th
ary approval.
cc: Community Development Director
Housing and Redevelopment Specialist
City Attorney
r i ~•
r
RESOLUTION N0. 25
RESOLUTION FINDIIV'G THE DISPOSITION
CF PROPERTY AT 711
WEST 66TH STREET AND 6600 LYNDALE AVENUE
TO BE IN C011-IPLIANCE WITH THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the
proposed disposition of property at 711 jVest 66th Street and
6600 Lyndale Avenue, and
WHEREAS, the proposed dispositions would be necessary
to implement the Lyndale/Hub/Nicollet Redevelopment Plan, and
WHEREAS, the proposed dispositions are consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has in the Lyndale
Hub Nicollet Redevelopment Plan and amendments thereto, found
the concept of the dispositions to be in compliance with the
city's Comprehensive Plan.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Com-
mission finds the proposed dispositions to be in compliance
with the city's Comprehensive Plan.
Passed by the Planning Commission of the City of
Richfield this 19th day of August, 1980.
Joseph Ertman, Chairman
Richfield Planning Commission
ATTEST:
Erich Russell, Secretary
~~
t
APPENDIX A TRANSITORY ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO. 16. A TRANSITORY ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE
DISPOSITION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY OF THE CITY
City of Richfield does Ordain:
Section 1. The following property of the City is hereby authorized
to be sold and disposed of:
All of Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Fairwood Shores subject to
a permanent easement for roadway and landscaping purposes
running in favor of the City of Richfield its successors
and assigns over the easterly 22.00 feet of said Lots and
the northerly 40.00 feet of said Lot 19 lying westerly of
said easterly 22.00 feet;
and
All of Lots 3 and 4, Block l,~Fairwood Shores subject to
a permanent easement for roadway and landscaping purposes
running in favor of the City of Richfield its successors and
assigns over that portion lying northerly of a line drawn
from a point on the easterly line of said Lot 3 distant
30.00 feet southerly from the northeast corner of said
Lot 3 to a point on the westerly line of said Lot 4 dis-
tant 35.6 feet southerly from the northwest corner of
said Lot 4.
Section 2. The terms and conditions of such sale shall be determined
by the City Council.
-~
a
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A
PROJECT UNDER THE PIUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPr1ENT ACT: REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO
THE COMMISSIONER OF SECURITIES FOR APPROVAL;
AND AUT}IORIZING EYECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF
AGREEPIENT AND PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUi1ENTS
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. It is hereby found, determined and declared as follows:
1.1 Ttie welfare of the State of Pinnesota requires active promo-
tion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound
industry and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, so far as
possible, emergency' of blighted lands grid areas of chronic unemploy-
ment, and the state has encouraged local government units to act to
prevent such economic deterioration.
.-~ ~
a .~4'~ i
`.
1.2 The S & M Company, a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter the
"Company"), has advised this Council of its desire to acquire and
improve land and to construct and equip thereon additional facilities
for and the expansion of a retail hardware store facility to be leased
to Lyndale Hardware for use in its business of the retail sale of
hardware and related products (the "Project").
1.3 The existence of the Project within the City would signifi-
cantly increase the tax base of the City, County and school district
in which the City is located, and would provide opportunities for
employment for residents of the City and surrounding area.
1.4 The City has been advised by the Company that conventional,
commercial financing to pay the capital cost of the Project is avail-
able only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that
the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be signif-
icantly reduced, but that with the aid of municipal financing, and its
. resulting low borrowing cost, the Project is economically more feas-
ible.
1.5 This Council has been advised by rliller & Schroeder Munici-
pals, Inc., investment bankers, that on the basis of information
submitted to them and the discussions with representatives of the
Company that bonds or notes to finance all or part of the cost of the
Project can be successfully sold, and that it will purchase such bonds
or notes.
1.6 The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474,
to issue its revenue bonds or other obligations (the "Bonds") to
finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in
connection with a revenue producing enterprise, such as that of the
Company, and the issuance of such Bonds by the City would be a sub-
stantial inducement to the Company to construct ttie Project within the
City.
2. On the basis of information given the City to date, it
presently appears that it would be in the best interest of the City to
issue its industrial development revenue Bonds under the provisions of
Chapter 474 to finance the Project of the Company at a cost presently
estimated to be approximately $1,500,000.
3. The Council declares that it is its present intE:nt to issue
the Bonds, and the Project is hereby given preliminary approval by the
City and the issuance of Bonds for such purpose and in such amount
approved, subject to approval of the Project by the Conunissioner of
Securities of the State of Pinnesota and to the mutual agreement of
this body, the Company and ttie initial purchasers of the bonds as to
the details of the bond issue and provisions for its payment. In all
events, -it is understood, however, that the Bonds shall not constitute
a charge, lien or encumbrance legal or equitable upon any property of
the City except the Project, and each Bond, when, as and if issued,
shall recite in substance that the bond, including interest thereon,
is payable solely from the revenues received from the Project and
~ . +.»
.`
i
properly pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a
debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, charter or
statutory limitation thereon.
4. The form of Plemorandum of Agreement relating to the issuance
of the Bonds to finance the cost of the Project is hereby approved,
and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to
execute the Plemorandum of Agreement in behalf of the City.
5. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.01,
Subdivision 7A, the Playor and City Clerk are authorized and directed
to submit the proposal for the Project to the Commissioner of Secur-
ities for approval: The Mayor, City Clerk, City Manager, City
Attorney and other officers, employees, and agents of the City and
Messrs. LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien & Drawz, as bond counsel,
are hereby authorized to provide the Commissioner with any preliminary
information needed for this purpose, and the City Attorney is author-
ized to initiate and assist in the preparation of such documents as
may be appropriate to the Project, if it is approved by the Commis-
sioner.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 25th day
of August, 1980.
Dona rie e Mayor
a
ATTEST:
Sy via K. Bergh Acting City Clerk
~y D
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 302
Agenda August 25,.1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Approval of Local Issues Portion of 1980/81
Local 49 Labor Contract Ageeement
There is an item on the August 25, 1980 city council agenda
providing for council approval of the local issues portion of
the 1980-1981 labor contract between the City of Richfield and
employees represented by Local 49 of the International Union of
Operating Engineers. The city's employees covered by this bar-
gaining contract are the various maintenance personnel assigned
to the Community Services Department. Earlier this year, the
city council approved the Master Contract which had been negoti-
_ ated with Local 49 on behalf of Richfield and approximately 22
other metropolitan area communities. The Master Contract estab-
lishes the major economic items, such as wages and the employer
insurance contribution, while the local issues address many oper-
ational concerns, such as vacation accrual, sick leave accrual,
etc., which may vary from city to city.
The changes in the local issues section of the 1980-1981
Local 49 contract include the following:
1. An additional step of longevity for employees having
15 years of service and hired before July 1, 1980;
with no longevity for employees hired after July 1,
1980. This means that qualifying employees will re-
ceive 1% bf base pay after 5 years of service, 2% of
base pay after 10 years of service, and 3% of base
pay after 15 years of service as longevity payments.
2. A stipulated list of equipment for which employees
will be paid Heavy Equipment Operator rates, including
the motor patrol, front loader of more than 2.5 yards
capacity, street sweeper, backhoe, seven ton or larger
roller, and steamer. The city has previously paid
HEO rates to operators of this equipment, although the
equipment has not previously been listed in the con-
tract.
Council Letter No. 302 -2- August 25, 1980
3. Increase maximum sick leave accrual from 800 to
960 hours, with 2 hour per month unlimited accrual
thereafter. This accumulation rate is consistent
with that provided to other employees of the city.
4. Language in contract providing that the stewards will
be paid for time spent in negotiations. This language
is also consistent with provisions of other labor con-
tracts that the city has.
5. Statement of vacation leave accrual rates on a bi-weekly
basis, rather than monthly, to conform to payroll
periods, aid establishment of a flat maximum accrual
of 240 vacation leave hours, rather than a fluctuating
accrual rate. This flat maximum has the impact of ex-
panding the maximum vacation accrual which employees
with fewer than 10 years of service may receive, and
slightly reducing the vacation leave accrual maximum
which employees with longer city service may have.
This maximum accrual is consistent with that established
for other city employees.
It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached
resolution, authorizing execution of this labor contract.
Respectfully submitted,
Q, ~D
-Karl Nollenberg
City Manager
KN/eja
cc: Community Services Director
Personnel Officer
Administrative Services Director
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOCAL ADDENDUM
OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD AND THE INTERNATIONAL UNION
OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 49, AFL-CIO
FOR THE PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 1980
AND ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1981
WHEREAS, the City D4anager has reached an agreement on the
local issues with the International Union of Operating Engineers,
Local 49, AFL-CIO, for• the period beginning January 1, 1980 and
ending December 31, 1981; and
WHEREAS, this agreement establishes the 1980/81 local contract
provisions, and
WHEREAS, the Personnel Ordinance requires that contracts between
the City and the exclusive representative of employees in an appro-
priate bargaining unit shall be implemented by council resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby
approve the Local Addendum of the Memorandum of Understanding between
the City of.Richfield-and the International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local 49, AFL-CIO .for the period beginning January 1, 1980
and ending December 31, 1980.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized
to execute the Local Addendum of the Agreement on behalf of the City
of Richfield.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richf field this 25th
day of August, 1980.
Donald J. Priebe D~ayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh Acting City Clerk
e
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 301
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
-City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Resolution Providing for Polling Places
and Designating Judges for City Primary
There is •a resolution on the council agenda for August 25,
19£0, designating polling places for the city primary to be
held September 9, 1980. The resolution also provides for
election judges at this primary.
It is recommended that the city council adopt the attached
resolution.
Resp ctfully submitted,
~0
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/ e j a
cc: Deputy Clerk
i
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR POLLING PLACES AND DESIGNATING
JUDGES FOR PRIMARY ELECTION - SEPTEMBER 9, 1980
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Richfield, as follows:
1. That there will be a primary election on Tuesday, September 9, 1980.
2. That said election shall be held at the polling places as herein
appear specified, and that the following are hereby appointed as
judges for said election:
PRECINCT
NUMBER POLLING PLACE ~ FIRST SHIFT SECOND SHIFT
1. Mt. Calvary Educational Bldg. *Shirley Gisselquist Shirley Gisselquit
6541 16th Avenue. South Marie Richardson Blanche Goodin
Helen Soderstrom Helen Soderstrom
Martha Siddy Verla Herberg
Lois Carlson Evelyn Pangilo
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
City Hall
6700 Portland Avenue South
*Elayne Gilhousen
Helen Peterson
Ann Burkhardt
Carol Bissonette
Gertrude Sanders
Elayne Gilhousen
Helen Peterson
Mary Suess
Gertrude Broker
Doris Lattery
Sheridan School
64th Street at Sheridan
Lincoln Hills School
75th and Penn Avenue South
West Junior High School
74th and Oliver Avenue South
Berea Lutheran Church
76th and Emerson Avenue South
*Denotes Chairperson
*Joyce Emerson
Lois Awes
Barbara Belk
P. Lloyd McKisson
Phoebe Nelson
*David Arnold
.Margaret Fleming
Beverly Stelman
Ruth Marks
Margaret Seeger
*Pat Bunting
Mary Janco
George Hegdahl
Grace Dahlien
Scott Myers
*Betty Obenchain
Pat Brenner
Bernice Johnnon
Betty Halloran
Alice Strom
Joyce Emerson
Lois Awes
Barbara Belk
Jenella Rice
Phoebe Nelson
David Arnold
Dorothy Briant
Beverly Stelman
Marlene Meyerson
Margaret Seeger
Pat Bunting
Mary Janco
Catherine Alfano
Alma Zeidler
Dee Wilcox
Betty Obenchain
Wilbur Johnson
Clarence E. Johnsc
Betty Halloran
Alice Strom
_..~~,:_:: ~v ._. .
-2-
RESOLUTION N0.
PRECINCT
NUMBER
7.
POLLING PLACE
Central School
72nd and Harriet Ave.
8. Portland School
72nd and 4th Avenue
9. Assumption Educ. Bldg.
305 E. 77th St.
10. Centennial School
73rd and Bloomington
FIRST SHIFT SECOND SHIFT
*Donna Vidas _ Donna Vidas
Ione Lunas Helen Hillstrom
Lorraine Utterber g Jean Killstrom
Rachei Pritchard Leona Thompson
Lillian Pearson Alice Hickinson
*Eunice Aulwes Eunice Aulwes
Marion Alquist Marion Alquist~
Mrs. Sid Sanford Mrs. Sid Sanford
June Alden ~ Ione 4daller
Chrystal Linn Pat Toney
*Darrell Koss *Gert Her71
Margaret LaVallee Joann Bloomberg
Loi s Kovack Loi s Kovack
Rosemary Koelln Linnae Erhardt
Audrey Winslow Audrey Winslow
*Corrine Cosgrove Corrine Cosgrove
Barbara Cook Barbara Cook
Marcia Boeller Marcia Boeller
Ilene Holen Glorie Swanson
Joan Schaefer Arline Thomas
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, this 25th
day of August, 1980.
r
Donald J. Priebe Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh Acting City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Off ice of City Manager
Council Letter No. 300
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Fence
Setbacks, Second Reading.
The requirement that all fences, hedges and walls must be
set back a minimum of three feet from the public right-of-way to
allow sufficient snow storage space between. fences and public
sidewalks, had generated some complaints and is not necessary
in areas of the city where there are no public sidewalks or plans
to construct them in the future. With the proposed ordinance
amendment, the city manager must find that the reduced setback
would not conflict with the city's sidewalk policy or create any
potential snow storage problems. This ordinance amendment is
intended to minimize the approval process which property owners
have to go through before they build a fence.
This ordinance amendment is placed on the August 25, 1980
city council agenda for second reading consideration.
Res ectfully submitted,
JV ~
Karl Nollenberg r
City Manager
KN/eja
cc: Community Development Director
Community Services Director
,~ City Attorney
quirement for fences which are to be located on non-collector or
non-arterial roadways in the city. A copy of the proposed ordin-
ance amendment is attached.
~ ~ rli`~IENDi~IE~~T TO CIfAPTER I I I ,
SECTION 3.39 OF THE
r _ ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY
OF RICHFIELD
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Chapter III, Section 3.39 of the Ordinance Cede of the City
of Richfield dealing with exemptions ar_d modifications to the
zoning code is hereby amended by amending subdivision 2, ~aragra~^
e., thereof to read as follows:
(e) A wall, fence or hedge may occ~,:py part of the required
yard; except that (1) no wall, fence or hedge :;yore than four
feet in height shall be constructed or permitted bet:aeen the
front line of the lot and the front line of the building
extended to the side lot lines. (2) no wall, fence or hedge
more than six feet in height shall be constructed or permitted
on any rear yard or sideyard, and (3) no wall, fence or hedge
more than four feet in the side abutting ~.;pon a street or
corner lot ~ehich abut upon a key lot. All pests on anLLa fence
located on or near the lot li n2 shall be on the inside of t:~e
fence unless they are designed as a integral part of the fence.
The term "hedges" as used in this paragraph shall not include
trees. All walls, fences and hedges abutting on the public
right-of-way shall be set back three feet from the public right
of way [ . ]
except that walls, fences and hedges abutting on public riG_ht-
C of-way which is contiguous to non-collector or non-arterial
roadways as designated by the adopted co:nprenensive plan may
be exempted from this set back provision cahen in the opinion
of the city manager such exemption will not conflict with anv_
existing city sidewalk policy nor create anv potential sno~,i
storage problem. Barbed wire and electric fences are prohibited.
Fences shall tie set back three feet from parking areas. On any
corner lot nothing shall be erected, placed, planted or allowed
to grow in such a manner as to obstruct vision between the
height of two and one-half feet above and ten feet above the
intersection of the center lines of the intersecting streets in
the area bounded by the street curb lines abutting said corner
lot and a line connecting points on the abutting curb lines fifty
feet from the intersection of the extensions of the curb lines.
All fences, walls and hedges legally existing on the effective
date of this amendment shall be allowed to continue to e moist and
to be repaired and maintained.
Passed by the City Council of the City or Richfield, Minnesota
this day of 1930.
ATTEST:
Donald J. I'riube, :•layor
Sylvia K. Bergh, ~ictir.g Cite Clerk
/~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 299
Agenda August 25, 1980
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 purchases of merchandise,
materials, equipment or construction when the amount exceeds
$1,000. There are two-such items on the council agenda of
August 25, 1980.
Liquid Carbon Dioxide
Liquid carbon is one of several chemicals used in the treat-
ment of water in the Richfield system. Richfield recently partic-
ipated in a joint bidding procedure with the cities of Minneapolis,
Bloomington and St. Paul for this commodity. The low bidder was
Liquid Carbonic Corporation with a base bid of $44.85 per ton,
F.O.B. destination, with no cash discount. Other bidders were
Airco Industrial Gases at a unit price of $56.00 per ton and Ca.rdox,
a division of Chemtron Corporation, at a unit price of $49.75 per
ton.
It is recommended that the city council authorize the purchase
of an estimated 200 ton of liquid carbon dioxide, on a keep fill
basis, at a unit price of $44.85. The total purchase from Liquid
Carbonic Corporation is an estimated $8,970.00, the funding for which
is included in the operating budget for the water maintenance divi-
sion.
Center Striping of Streets
Hennepin County work forces recently striped the center-line on
several Richfield streets including all of 76th Street, 66th Street
from Cedar Avenue to Standish Avenue, Standish Avenue from 66th
Street to 62nd Street, 65th Street from Nicollet to Rae Drive, Rae
Drive ,to 66th Street, 12th Avenue from 66th Street to 78th Street,
Bloomington Avenue from 62nd Street to 66th Street, all of Cedar
Avenue and several service roads. In exchange for the center line
stripes, the city must now pay Hennepin County $1,600~for the labor
r
Council Letter No. 299 -2-
August 25, 1980
and equipment used in the project and replace the paint that was
used by Hennepin County. The paint, known as twenty second paint
(meaning it will dry within 20 seconds of application) is a special
kind of paint used for this purpose and replacement will include
yellow paint, white paint and glass beads. The only vendor identi-
fied is Earl Anderson and Associates who quote $1,065.90 for the
yellow paint, $341.55 for the white paint and $385.00 for the glass
beads. In addition, there would be an approximate $300 charge for
freight on the delivery on the paint.
It is recommended that the city council authorize the purchase
of paint for an estimated total of $2,092.45 including freight.
Respectfully submitted,
IV ~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/jf
cc: Community Services Director
1
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 298
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable P•4ayor
and
P•Zembers of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Plant Materials, Adams Hill Park
At the August 11, 1980 city council meeting, the city council
reviewed the bid minutes and tabulations for the three contracts
related to the major redevelopment of Adams Hill Park. At that
time, the council awarded contracts to Sebesta Construction and
Barr/Nelson, Inc. for construction of the proposed improvements,
contingent on final project funding from LAWCON and LCMR. Pre-
paration of contract documentation is proceeding with these two
contracts.
The third contract for which bids were taken was for planting.
Timm Nursery and Landscape, Inc. from Norwood, MN was the appar-
ent-low bidder for this item, including the base bid and selected
alternate 1 for eastern red cedar. The total anticipated contract
amount was $31,134: It was the recommendation of the staff that
action on Contract C, planting, be deferred until August 25, 1980
by which time the City of Richfield and the City of Edina would
have had a chance for additional discussions related to the Adams
Hill Park site which might affect the planting contract.
The city manager and community services director have met
with staff from the City of Edina since August 11. The City of
Edina has agreed to provide plantings from their nursery for the
Adams Hill Park project. In addition, the developers of the
Durham apartment adjacent to Adams Hill Park still have some ob-
ligation to the City of Edina which it appears can most likely
be met through funding or the provision of plant materials for
Adams Hill Park. It is hoped that the earthwork for the Lroject
can be completed this fall and that the majority of building work
can be completed by next spring. Any planting at Adams Hill Park
would probably not take place until 1981. It is the staff's
recommendation that we plan to meet the planting needs for Adams
Hill Park in cooperation with the City of Edina, primarily through
their nursery stock and through the obligations yet to be met
by Windsor Development.
As construction on the Adams Hill Park project nears comple-
f
Council Letter No. 298 -2- August 25, 1980
tion, including the planting plan, we will again review the
project. Should it be necessary to purchase additional plant
materials at that time, quotations or bids would be taken at
that time.
Therefore, it is reco~-runended that the city council reject
all bids for Contract C: Planting for Adams Hill Park major de-
velopment project, and authorize the staff to continue efforts
to implement the planting plan as described above, in conjunction
with the City of Edina.
Re pectfully submitted,
JV o
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
xra/
6
CITY OF RICHFIELD,MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 297
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Ordinance Amendment Relating to Hours
of Business for Unattended Car Washes.
Second Reading.
At the July
approved first re
council meeting, the city council
dinance amendment reflecting that
Res ectfully submitted,
~~ n
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/ e j a
cc: Public Safety Director
City Clerk
Second reading of the ordinance amendment has been scheduled
for the August 25, 1980 city council agenda. A copy of the ordin-
ance amendment is attached for city council review.
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VI
SECTION 6.04 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD RELATING
TO AUTOMOBILE ~aASHING ESTABLISHP-'BENTS
CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN:
Chapter VI, Section 6.04 of the Ordinance Code of the
City of Richfield relating to the licensing and regulation
_ ~
of automobile washing establishments is amended by amending ~~~~
subdivision 12, paragraph (2) thereof to read as follows:
"(2) If no one is in attendance he business shall be
closed {a) between the hours of 10• p.m. and 6:00 a.m. of
the following day in the case of any such business which is
abutting upon or within 100 feet of a residential zoned area
and (b) between the hours of 12:00 midnight and 6:00 a.m. of
the following day in all other cases."
Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield,
Minnesota this 25
day of August 1980.
Donald Priebe, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia Bergh, City Clerk
l'
~~
L
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 296
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richf field
Council Members:
Subject: Public Hearing Regarding Cable Television Franchise
television system in Richfield. As council members are aware,
these proposals have been submitted for CATV service in Richfield
in conjunction with the provision of similar services in Eden
Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, and Minnetonka. The proposals submitted
to the Southwest Cable TV Commission {comprised of these five cities)
have previously been provided to the council members, and as well
have been available for public scrutiny at the public library in
Richfield and in the city hall offices. Three proposals were re-
franchising process,
have been requested to make a brief presentation at the beginn
of the hearing. Subsequent to those presentations, the counci
and interested citizens will have the opportunity to make stat
or ask questions of the applicants.
par
is recommended that the
permanent record regarding the franchising process.
Respectfully submitted,
!V 4
Karl Nollenber r
City Manager
f a proposal at that time. In order to assist interested
the public in responding to the issues raised in the
At the conclusion of the heari
KN/ej a
ceived in June, 1980.
iy C.
CITY OF RTCHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 295
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Renewal of Contract for Hotel/Motel Inspections
On September 24, 1979, the council authorized an agreement
with the State of Minnesota for the City of Richfield to take over
all of the hotel/motel fire inspection responsibilities. The fire
division has satisfactorily executed this contract with the state,
and conducted the required inspections during the past year.
In return for transfer of this responsibility from the state
to the city, the state has allowed members of our fire division to
participate in the Fire Marshall Enforcement Inspection Training
Program, offered by the State Department of Public Safety. This is
a three-week highly specialized training program dealing with the
provisions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. There is no tuition
charged to the city for our participation in this program, and. the
city is reimbursed for any direct cost incurred by participating
employees.
The training program offered by the state as part of this
project is an outstanding opportunity for a number of fire division
employees to receive formalized training in the application of the
Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. The transfer of inspection responsi-
bilities for hotels/motels to the City of Richfield has not created
an additional workload on our fire division, since we have historic-
ally conducted local inspections of these facilities. Presently
there are only three motels in the city.
It is the recommendation of the Public Safety Director, in
which I concur, that the city council authorize the city manager
to renew the agreement with the state to continue to participate in
this program. The program has been extremely beneficial in provid-
ing some of our fire officers with formal training in the applica-
tion of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. Our continued participa-
tion will allow more of our fire officers to take advantage of this
excellent training opportunity.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ~~
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF AUTHORIZATION FOR
AN AGREEMEDTT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF RICHFIELD AND THE STATE OF MINNEOSTA
TO CONDUCT HOTEL/MOTEL FIRE INSPECTIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield has a vital interest in the fire
safety standards of local hotel/motel operations, and
WHEREAS, the City of Richfield is currently under contract with
the State of Minnesota to provide the required hotel/motel fire in-
spections, and
WHEREAS, both parties to this agreement seek to continue this
contractual arrangement for the year 1981.
NOP7, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the city council of the City
of Richfield hereby authorize the city manager to renew the agree-
ment between the State of Minnesota and the City of Richfield to
provide, on a contractual basis, fire inspectional services to all
hotel/motel businesses within the city.
Passed by the city council of the City of Richfield, this 25th
day of August, 1980.
Donald J. Priebe Mayor
ATTEST:
Sylvia K. Bergh, eputy City Clerk
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 294
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Application for On-Sale Wine License
Northstar Pizza Corporation (Shakey's)
500 East 78th Street
The city has received an application for an on-sale wine license
from Northstar Pizza Corporation and its vice president, David J.
Whetstone, operating in Richfield as Shakey's Pizza Parlor. The
application has been referred to the Department of Public Safety for
investigation, which has now been completed.
for a restaurant
permit
business.
ue is
the wine licensing application itself. The application has been sub-
mitted by Mr. David J. Whetstone of 12721 Appleview Lane, Burnsville.
Mr. Whetstone is the Vice President and Operating Manager~of Northstar
Pizza Corporation which owns and operates Shakey's Pizza Parlor. The
criminal record check investigation conducted by the Public Safety
Department indicates that neither bor. Whetstone nor any other officer
of the applicant corporation has any criminal history record which
would preclude issuance of the requested license. The applicant
corporation has operated the existing restaurant business at its
present location since 1964. During most of the period of operation
the applicant has held a non-intoxicating malt liquor beverage license
issued by the City of Richfield. During this period of operation,
the Public Safety Department has no record of significant complaints
involving the business which would tend to preclude issuance of the
license requested. The only present proposed change in the business
operation is the addition of on-sale wine service with meals.
The investigation conducted by the Public Safety Department
indicates that there appear to be no significant outstanding debts
related to the Richfield operation. The business is housed in a
leased building and all pertinent matters related to the lease
appear to be in order. An unaudited financial statement from the
applicant's accountant indicates that the business had total sales
of $764,679 for the fiscal year ended P~4ay, 1980. The financial
Council Letter No. 294 -2-
August 25, 1980
In accordance with provisions of the ordinance code, the Public
Safety Department has conducted the required reference interviews as
part of the license investigation process. Interviews were conducted
with both present suppliers of the business as well as with personal
acquaintances of the applicant. The response to all of these refer-
ence interviews was very positive with regard to the character and
business ability of the applicant as well as with regard to the
applicant's past business practices and supplier relationships.
Additionally, general reference checks were made on the other officers
of the applicant corporation. The response to all of these reference
checks was also very positive with regard to the character of the
individuals involved.
Based upon
information dev
the opinion of
KN/eja
cc: Public Safety Director
Deputy City Clerk
applicant, and the
wtigation, it is
Director, in which I concur, that
which would prohibit the issuance
Respectfully submitted,
JV o
K rl Nollenberge
City Manager
the information provided by the
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 293
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richf iel-d
~i ~. R-~3 ~ ~ ~~-~ EaaT ~PI-Il
_.___
Council Members:
Subject: Presentation of Award to
"Employee of the Quarter"
An item has been scheduled on the August 25, 1980 city council
agenda providing for formal council recognition of Clarence Vader,
custodian at the Richfield Community Center, who has been selected
as the "Employee of the Quarter" for the period April-June, 1980.
The "Employee of the Quarter" is a new program established in
January, 1980 to give recognition to city employees who make sig-
nificant contributions to the overall city organization. Clarence
Vader was selected this quarter for his continuous outstanding
service to the city. He performs his duties above and beyond the
expectations of his position, arriving early each morning to make
sure the building is set up for the day's activities, making sure.
citizens using the building are comfortable and their needs are
met (the majority of these people are senior citizens and the
handicapped), comes in at any hour of the day or night, during the
week or on a weekend, if an emergency arises, and is willing to do
whatever is necessary to assist the other employees at the Commun-
ity Center. Clarence has been a city employee for eleven years
Mr. Vader will be present at the August 25, 1980 city council
meeting to receive this award.
Respectfully submitted,
~O ~~
Karl Nollenber z`
City Manager
KN e a ~~~ ~ ~',:, ~,
~,~--~ v-~-e ~_
D '~C ~'~ 'l9 ~ ~'nfl'....
i~8
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 292
Agenda August 25, 1980
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Council Members:
Subject: Consideration of Amendment to Suburban
Rate Authority Joint Powers Agreement
There is an item on the August 25, 1980 city council agenda
providing for council consideration of an amendment to the joint
powers agreement authorizing the Suburban Rate Authority.
The Suburban Rate Authority is an organization comprised of
numerous metropolitan area municipalities. The SRA is generally
charged with monitoring the operation and activities of public
utilities in the metropolitan area, with the intent of insuring
equitable and reasonable public utility rates and service levels
for metropolitan area residents. Council Members Luettinger and
Collins represent Richfield on the Suburban Rate Authority, and
our City Attorney, Clayton LeFevere, also serves as legal counsel
to the SRA.
Several weeks ago, the council discussed two issues pending
before the Suburban Rate Authority, relating to a filing for an
electrical rate increase for Northern States Power Company, and
to the rates and charges, and general activities of the Metrop-
olitan Waste Commission. At that time, the council took no action
on these issues, but rather recommended that our representatives
to the Suburban Rate Authority identify what role municipalities
individually, or collectively, should play in resolving these
issues. Subsequently, the Suburban Rate Authority at its July
16, 1980 meeting, recommended that the SRA not take collective
position with regard to the request of the NSP rate change, but
that the member communities of the organization consider an amend-
ment to the joint powers agreement which would authorize the SRA
to participate in issues involving the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission. The joint powers agreement does not presently auth-
orize SRA involvement in Waste Control Commission issues.
Attached to this council letter is a letter from SRA Attorn-
ey LeFevere, elaborating on these issues. Also attached is a
• Council Letter No. 292 -2- August 25, 1980
resolution for council consideration which would authorize
amendment to the joint powers agreement which would authorize
the SRA involvement in matters relating to the Metropolitan
Waste Control Commission. I have also attached copies of the
Suburban Rate Authority meeting minutes from July 16, 1980 and
April 16, 1980, where these issues were discussed.
Res ectfully submitted,
~D
Karl Nollenberger
City Manager
KN/eja
cc: City Attorney
WHEREAS, the City of , t~iinnesota
has entered into a Joint and Cooperative Agreement providing
for the creation of the Suburban Rate Authority, and
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO
JOINT AND COOPERATIVE AGREEP~iENT
WHEREAS, the present form of such Joint and Cooperative
Agreement does not authorize the Suburban Rate Authority to
participate in proceedings or engage in activities involving
the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Suburban Rate Authority
has recommended that such organization be authorized to par-
ticipate in proceedings or engage in activities involving
the I~ietropolitan Waste Control Commission, and
WHEREAS, it appears necessary and desirable that such author-
ity be conferred upon the Suburban Rate Authority and that
this be accomplished by the execution of the amendment to
the Joint and Cooperative Agreement.
NO~rl, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the
City of Minnesota as
follows:
1. The mayor and (Clerk, Manager) are authorized and
directed to execute the Amendment to the Joint and Cooperative
Agreement giving authority for Suburban Rate Authority
involvement in matters relating to the Metropolitan Waste
Control Commission.
RESOLUTIOt~t NO.
2. The city clerk is directed to file a copy of the
executed Amendment to the Joint and Cooperative Agreement,
together with a certified copy of this resolution, with the
Secretary/Treasurer of the Suburban Rate Authority.
Adopted
1980
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
LAW OFFICES
LEFEVERE,LEFLER, PEARSON, O BRIEN &DRAWZ
Ii00 FIRST NA710 NAL BANK BUILDING
CLAYTON L• LcFEVERE BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICES
H ERBER7 P
LEFLER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
. 610 BROOKDALE TOWERS
CURTIS A. PEARSON
J. DENNIS O~BRIEN TELEPHONE 1612) 333-0543 2810 COUNTY ROAD 10
• BROOKLYN CENTER
MINNESOTA 55430
JOHN E. DRAWZ
,
bAVID J. KENNEDY (612) 56I-3200
JOHN B. DEAN
GLENN E PURDUE RICHARD J. SCHIEFFER
JAMES D. LARSON
CHARLES L. LcFEVERE
HERBERT P. LEFLER, III
JEFFREY ,J. STRAND
JAMES P. O~MEARA
MARY J. BJORKLUND ^/
August ( ,
1980
THOMAS~D. CR EIG HTON
W ENOY L. FREEDMAN
Dear Municipal Administrator:
This letter is being sent at the request of the Suburban Rate
Authority Board of Directors.
It involves several matters which they believe will be of par-
ticular interest to you.
First, your special attention is invited to the NSP electric rate
filing which is discussed in the enclosed SRA Board minutes for
July 16, 1980. As you will see, the company has filed for a 12
2/3 percent overall rate increase, but this increase will not be
uniform among the various classes of customers. The proposed
rate increase for municipalities and for street lighting will be
greater than for other classes of customers. This is justified
by the company as being necessary in order to equalize the rates
of return among the various classes of customers.
The SRA Board has authorized a contest of some aspects of NSP's
rate filing. However, it does not feel that it should resist
this shift in~ the revenue burden (after the total authorized
revenues of the company are determined). If the SRA were to
undertake such an effort and were successful it would only cast a
greater share of the revenue burden upon residen~.ial, commercial
and industrial electric ratepayers within the member municipali-
ties. This would put the municipality (as an electric customer)
at odds with the other electric consumers in member communities.
However, the SRA Board felt that individual municipalities might
wish to express their own viewpoints about the proposed equaliza-
tion of rates of return among classes of customers. The Board
wanted you to be alerted to this question so that you may take
whatever action you deem appropriate. One way of making your
position known, if you should choose to do so, would be by appear-
ing at the general hearings which the Public Utilities Commission
LAW OFFICES
LEFEVERE. LEFLER, PEARSON, O~BRIEN & DRAWZ
August 7, 1980
Page 2
will hold on NSP's rate filing. The schedule and location of such
general hearings is as follows:
September 15, 1980 7:30 p.m. (Monday) AUDITORIUM, HENNEPIN
COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 300 So. 6th
Street, Minneapolis (Hearing Examiner:
Richard DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 16, 1980 7:30 p.m., LARGE HEARING ROOM, 7th Floor",
American Center Bldg., 160 E. Kellogg
Blvd., St. Paul (Hearing Examiner: Richard
DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 17, 1980 2:00 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS,
CITY HALL ANNEX, St. Cloud (Hearing Exami-
ner: Richard DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 18, 1980 2:00 p.m. ASSEMBLY ROOM, CHIPPEWA COUNTY
COURT HOUSE, 11th St. & Washington Avenue,
Montevideo (Hearing Examiner: Richard
DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 22, 1980 2:00 p.m., BOARD ROOM, GOVERNMENT CENTER,
Highway 55, Hastings, MN 55033 (Hearing
Examiner: Richard DeLong 612/296-8117)
7:30 p.m., COMMISSIONER'S ROOM, WINONA
COUNTY COURT HOUSE, Winona (Hearing Exami-
ner: Richard DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 23, 1980 7:30 p.m. COMMUNITY SERVICES BUILDING,
DINING ROOM, 12 Central, Faribault (Hear-
ing Examiner: Richard DeLong 612/296-8117)
September 24, 1980 7:30 p.m. LAKESIDE INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL,
} CAFETERIA, Highway 8, Chisago City, MN
(Hearing Examiner: Richard DeLong 612/
296-8117)
October 30, 1980 7:30 p.m. PUBLIC MEETING ROOM, CLAY COUNTY
COURT HOUSE, Moorhead (Hearing Examiner:
Richard DeLong 612/296-8117-)
A second major action that the SRA Board has asked that we submit
to you is the following:
LAW OFFICES
LEFEVERE. LEFLER, PEARSON.O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
August 7, 1980
Page 3
Over the last several years, the SRA Board, has, from time to
time, talked about the need for municipal involvement in the
programs of the Metropolitan Waste Control~Commission ("MWCC").
It is clear that the SRA does not have the financial resources or
expertise which would be necessary to conduct a detailed review
of the capital and operating budgets of the MWCC.
On the basis of information which has been presented to the SRA
Board by the chairman and the chief planning officer of the
Metropolitan Council, it appears that the Metropolitan Council
does not presently have the staffing necessary for a complete
review of MWCC capital and operating budgets either. (The Metro-
politan Council does have authority to appoint the members of the
MWCC. It also issues bonds on behalf of the MWCC and it reviews
and approves of MWCC's capital budgets.)
Recently, there have been hearings conducted by a hearing exami-
ner in behalf of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on the
question of what advanced sewage treatment facilities (tertiary
treatment} should be required to be constructed by the MWCC. The
United States Environmental Protection Agency and others have
strongly advocated additional facilities costing between $700
million and $1 billion. If such facilities are required to be
constructed, it will, of course, be necessary to make a substan-
tial increases in the rates MWCC charges metropolitan area com-
munities. Spokesmen for both the MWCC and the Metropolitan
Council have expressed disappointment at the fact that there was
not more testimony from municipalities during the hearings. This
has led the Board of Directors of the SRA to believe that the SRA
should be permitted to involve itself in MWCC rate-related
issues - even if that involvement is on an occasional and highly
selective basis.
The Joint and Cooperative Agreement which provides for the Subur-
ban Rate Authority does not now authorize SRA participation in
any issues involvixig the MWCC. At its July 16, 1980 meeting, the
Board of Directors of the SRA voted unanimously to recommend to
SRA member communities that they authorize an amendment to the
Joint and Cooperative Agreement so that the SRA can involve
itself in MWCC matters to the extent that the Board may from time
to time authorize such involvement.
We are therefore enclosing a copy of an Amended Joint and Coopera-
tive Agreement for the SRA. The changes in the agreement are
underscored. They appear on pages 2, 11 and 12 of the agreement.
We are also enclosing a copy of a resolution, for consideration
by your city council, which would authorize the execution of the
LAW OFFICES
_ LEFEVERE, LEFLER, PEARSON, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ
August 7, 1980
Page 4
Amended Joint and Cooperative Agreement by your community. One of
the enclosed copies of the Amended Joint an_d Cooperative Agree-
ment and a certified copy of the authorizing resolution should be
signed by the appropriate officers of your community and returned
to us in the enclosed self-addressed envelope.
It is recognized that if the amendment to. the Joint and Coopera-
tive Agreement is adopted by SRA's members, there is a risk that
the Suburban Rate Authority will be expected to provide a much
more thoroughgoing review and investigation of MWCC activities
than the SRA, with its limited resources, can provide. It will
only be possible for the SRA to involve itself from time to time
on MWCC matters on a very limited and selective basis. However,
it may wish to act as a focal point for information about such
things as PSC hearings and major capital programs of the MWCC.
Under certain circumstances, the SRA Board may wish the SRA to
assist in organizing the presentation of testimony about MWCC
programs before such organizations as the PSC or the Legislature
or the Metropolitan Council.
The minutes of the April 16 and the July 16, 1980 Board meetings
of the SRA are also enclosed because they provide further, more
detailed background information about the two issues which are
the subjects of this letter.
If you should have any questions concerning this matter, please
do not hesitate to give me a call.
Very truly yours,
CLL: jpf
Clayton L. LeFevere, Attorney
Suburban Rate Authority
Enclosures
D4INUTES OF QUARTERLY NIEETING OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
July 16, 1980
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof the quarterly
meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at~the
Ambassador Motor Hotel, in the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, on Wednesday, July 16, 1980, commencing at 6:30
p.m.
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by
Chairman David McGraw.
2. Roll Call: Upon roll call attendance was found to
be as follows:
Bloomington
Brooklyn Park
Columbia Heights
Edina
Mendota Heights
Minnetonka
Plymouth
Richfield
Robbinsdale
Shoreview
Robert W. Darr
Graydon R. Boeck
Gayle Norberg
Bruce G. Nawrocki
J. N. Dalen
Orvil J. Johnson
Elizabeth Witt
Robert DeGhetto
FredericJc Moore
Vern Luettinger
Juanita Collins
Roger Kroh
David P . McGraw
Also in attendance were Clayton L. LeFevere and James D.
Larson, SRA attorneys; Mr. Charles Weaver, Chairman of the
Metropolitan Council and Mr. Maurice Dorton, Director of
Planning of the Metropolitan Council.
3. Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the April
16, 1980 quarterly meeting of the SRA Board were presented.
It was moved by Mr} Norberg, seconded by Mr. Luettinger that
the minutes be approved as mailed. Carried unanimously.
4. Treasurer's Report: Mr. Dalen presented a financial
report showing the financial condition of the SRA as of
June 30, 1980. The report indicated that on that date the
SRA had a cash fund balance of $5,008.87 and investments
costing $94,504.65 and having a face value of $95'",000.00.
It was moved by Mr. Nawrocki, seconded by Mr. Johnson that
the treasurer's report be received. Carried unanimously.
5. Claims: Mr. Dalen then presented the following
claims:
LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien
& Drawz, legal services for the
period from April 4, 1980 through
July 10, 1980 - $ •1,775.04
Meeting expense - Messrs. Charles
b9eaver and Maurice Dorton - $ 15.50
It was moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by Mr. Norberg that
these claims be approved and paid. Carried unanimously.
6. Status of Regulatory Proceedings: Mr. Larson
reported on the NSP electric rate filing.
The company has filed for a general 12.660 rate increase
which would entitle the company to a $77.5 million increase
in company revenues for the test year which commences on
August 1, 1980, and ends on July 31, 1981.. He further
reported as follows:
The company has implemented an interim rate adjustment
increasing each rate class 12.660. This interim rate adjust-
ment will be effective until the Commission issues an order
on this case. If the rate increase were to be distributed
in such a way that each class of customers would provide the
same rate of return in the test year, the increases would be
as follows:
Residential: 22.70
Commercial and
Industrial: 5.30
Municipal: 43.30
Lighting: 30.40
However, the company has proposed that rate adjustments be
made so that the rates of return would be equalized among
classes of customers over a three-year period rather than a
one-year period. The company has therefore proposed the
following increases which, for the test year, would give
them an overall 12.660 rate increase:
Residential,:
Commercial and
Industrial:
Municipal:
Lighting:
15.70
10.40
24.00
18.50
-2-
Municipal governments will no doubt be particularly affected
by the proposed 24.Oo municipal increase and the 18.50
lighting increase. The implications of such increases are
not presently known. The municipal rates are, in many
instances, predominantly for municipal pumping, e. g.
municipal water and sewer pumps'. Increases in municipal
rates, therefore, might become operating costs for the
municipalities' utilities, to a large extent. Such costs
would presumably be passed on to utility customers,
The increase in street lighting rates could be expected to
be borne, in most instances, as part of the operating bud-
gets of municipalities. The increased rate would be paid by
taxpayers and would be borne, therefore, on the basis of
taxable property valuations. these valuations, of course,
would result in a somewhat different distribution in the
revenue load than would be the case if the increased revenue
were collected from the' residential, commercial and indus-
trial customers, as such.
The Public Service Commission will decide what the total
revenue requirements of the company will be. It will then
decide how the revenue burden will be distributed among the
various classes of customers. If the percentage increase in
rates for municipal and street lighting services is reduced,
it would then be necessary to increase the rates for residen-
tial, commercial and industrial services.
Apart from the rate design questions, the primary issues in
the case will be:
(a) The company's requested 15.50 rate of return on
common equity which compares with a 13o rate of
return on common equity allowed by the Commission
in the last filing. The company justifies its
request for this high return on equity as neces-
sary to attract investment as it forecasts a $6.3
billion investment over the next decade with $2.5
billion to come from the investment community.
(b) The company plans to write off $10.9 million of
its investment in the Tyrone Energy. Park in the
test year. This write-off will continue over a
five-year period at approximately $11 million per
year.
(c) The company has incorporated a number of standards
urged by the National Energy Agency in_the Public
Utilities Regulatory Policy Act of 1978. Among
these are time-of-use rates, the elimination of
declining block rates, and the setting of rates on
a cost-of-service basis. The company has elim-
inated its conservation rate. break and, as indica-
ted above, is attempting to equalize rates of
return by class.
-3-
(d) The company is.asking for an increase in working
capital to account for the lag in payment of
depreciation, deferred taxes, and nuclear fuel
amortization. This was an issue on the last case
which the SRA opposed and successfully convinced
the Commission to deny the adjustment. This is an
issue which the SRA might again wish to pursue.
Approximately $3 million of the company's $77.5
million increase results from this proposed
treatment of deferred taxes, depreciation, and
nuclear fuel amortization.
He reported that the following'schedule has been established
for the case:
Deadline for filing intervention July 14, 1980
Deposition of NSP witnesses by intervenors
August 11 through 22, 1980
Intervenor testimony filed on October 6, 1980
Depositions of intervenor witnesses October 13
through 17, 1980
Rebuttal testimony filed November 10, 1980
Evidentiary hearings November 17 through
December 12, 1980
Statutory deadline for Commission order April 30,
1981
The following parties have intervened in the case:
Department of Public Services
Office of Consumer Services
Fargo-Moorhead Apartment Association
People Involved in Rice County
City of Moorhead
St. Paul Chamber of Commerce
Minnesota Energy Agency
Minnesota Senior Federation
Minnesota Department of Administration
Minnesota Public Interest Research Group
City of St. Paul
-4-
At the conclusion of his report, there was discussion about
the proper role for the SRA to play in this proceeding. Mr.
Larson indicated that he did not believe it would be advisable
for the SRA to attempt to present testimony on the proper
rate of return. He said that the Participating Department
Staff and the Office of Consumer Services are jointly sponsoring
an outside rate-of-return witness. This will provide testimony
in addition to Staff testimony on that subject.
He indicated that there are some questions. as to what expenses
ought to be included in the rate base. He cited the company's
attempt in the last proceeding to include depreciation,
nuclear fuel amortization and several other items in working
capital. The company's effort to include some of these
items was defeated through the efforts of the SRA and through
the testimony of Mr. Hess in the last proceeding. The
company is attempting to include such items again. Their
witness is attacking the rationale for the company's decision.
Approximately $3 million in annual revenues is involved in
this controversy. Mr. Larson indicated that he believed the
SP,A should continue to fight to disallow these items as part
of the working capital. He said he thought this could be
done without the active involvement of Mr. Hess through
cross-examination and briefing.
He pointed out that costs incurred on the proposed Boecker
No. 4 generating plant are being expensed in this case.
After further discussion, it was moved by Mr. Boeck, seconded
by Nir. Luettinger that the Board authorize and approve the
intervention of the SRA in NSP's current electric rate
filing and that the attorneys be authorized to participate
on a limited basis in the proceeding; such participation to
be limited to not more than $15,000 in legal expenses; and
with such participation to consist of monitoring the proceed-
ing, cross-examining where necessary and briefing issues
where appropriate. Carried unanimously.
a
Members of the Board requested the attorneys to advise all
member municipalities of the municipal and lighting rate
increases which are being proposed by the company. It was
also requested that the municipalities be informed of the
dates of the general hearings so that municipal officials
may, if they so desire, appear and testify about the affect
of the proposed increases upon municipal budgets.
-5-
Mr. Norberg moved that the SRA tender its services to any
municipal corporations which desire to oppose the municipal
and lighting rate increases-with such representation to be
paid for by the communities requesting such special represen-
tation on the rate design issues. The motion was discussed
and after discussion, there being no second,-the chairman
declared that the motion had failed.
7. Corporate Authorization Resolution: Secretary/Treasurer
Dalen presented a proposed corporate authorization resolution
designating the First National Bank of Minheapolis as depository
for the funds of the SRA and permitting the signing of -
checks by any two of the following:
Chairman, Vice-Chairran and Secretary/Treasurer
It was moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by Mr. Johnson, that the
resolution be adopted and that the officers of the corporation
be authorized to present a verified copy of such resolution
to the depository. Carried unanimously.
8. Possible Assessment of Members: Secretary/Treasurer
Dalen was asked to comment on whether or not he recommended
any assessment of members for the year 1981. He indicated
that he did not recommend such assessment. After discussion,
it was moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by I~~r. Luettinger that
there be no assessment of members for the year 1981. Carried
unanimously.
9. Comments of Charles Weaver, Chairman of the Metropolitan
Council: The chairman introduced Mr. Charles Weaver, Chairman
of the Metropolitan Council ("MC") and indicated that D•Ir.
Weaver had been invited to comment on the role of the D~letropolitan
Council in relation to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
("ML^ICC") Mr. Weaver was accompanied by Mr. Maurice Dorton,
Director of Planning of the Metropolitan Council,
Mr. Weaver indicated that the members of the MWCC are appointed
by the D'iC. The MC}does not review the operating budget of
the MWCC but it does, annually, review the M64CC's capital
budget. The MC does attempt to look at the effect of capital
expenditures upon the operating costs of the MWCC. He
indicated that he was somewhat concerned about whether there
is a sufficient flow of information between the MC and the
MPdCC so that the review of the MC is adequate. F-Ie said that
he was greatly concerned about this question. The scope of
activity of the MWCC is so great and so technical in nature
that it is almost impossible for the MC to maintain the kind
of staff which would be necessary to permit a thoroughgoing
analysis of the capital and operating recommendations being
made by the MWCC staff.
-6-
He agreed with the necessity for effective review of the
programs of the MG4CC and expressed hope that some solution
could be found to this problem.
b1r. Dorton indicated that the MC has taken seriously its
responsibility in reviewing IvSWCC capital costs. The D4C has
given the MWCC policy direction in several respects:
(1) It has directed that the MWCC should not move towards
advanced-waste treatment facilities (tertiary treatment).
Preliminary planning for such facilities has been approved
but detailed construction planning has not been approved.
This has displeased the EPA but the MC has asked that
construction planning be deferred until there is sufficient
evidence to show that the costs of such tertiary facilities
can be justified. He reported that the federal General
Accounting Office ("GAO") appears likely to recommend against
federal grants for such advanced waste treatment facilities.
He indicated that there is a possibility that tertiary
treatment would not make any real difference in water quality
in some surface waters in the metropolitan area, such as the
Minnesota River. He said that at the recent PCA hearings
the MC had taken the position that the present and potential
uses of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers do not appear
to justify the standards of treatment which were being pro-
posed and were under consideration by the PCA. He said that
all of the testimony on such proposals has been submitted
and that the report of the hearing examiner is expected in
the near future.
(2) The NIC has asked the MWCC to go slow on the elimination
of combined sewers. This was done because it was not yet
apparent that the benefits to be derived from such sanitary
sewer-storm sewer separation will justify the costs. This
is because the use of combined sewers has not resulted in
the discharge of a large percentage of sanitary sewer flow
into public waters in the metropolitan area.
He indicated that St. Paul is disputing development in some
of the suburbs because St. Paul gets more runoff as the
result of such development and must therefore pay for the
treatment of such additional runoff.
He indicated that the age of metropolitan sewers and the
rehabilitation costs need to be studied. The D1G~CC has been
urged to study the magnitude of the rehabilitation problem.
He said that the position of the MC is that the NIP7CC (in the
metropolitan area) should try to use the sewer capacity that
we now have in interceptors and plants before undertaking to
build any new major facility.
-7-
The MC has tried to support plants which are less labor-
intensive but he acknowledged that there is still some
question as to whether current efforts along this line have
proven to be cost effective. He said that in selecting
capital cost options, operating costs are taken into account.
He also indicated that it has been difficult for the MC to
develop the staff expertise necessary to challenge MWCC
proposals. He cited a number of instances where a number of
proposals were modified by the MC.
He then commented on some issues that will be coming up in
.the future. The last bonds issued by the MC for the benefit
of the MWCC were issued in 1972. Debt service has been
fairly constant but the operating budget has been rising, in
part as a consequence of extensive new construction. Avery
significant amount of new debt will have to be incurred in
the early 1980's. The ,question will be how much should be
constructed in the way of new facilities (so as to open up
new service territories in the metropolitan area) and how
much shall be expended for better treatment facilities.
He indicated that not all new facility costs resulting from
facilities already constructed, or under construction, have
been included in the AILti~CC's operating budget. These costs
will add to MbVCC's rates in the absence of any further
capital investments.
The DiC has reviewed and commented upon P•1WCC's user charges
and has asked the P4WCC to "hold the line" on SAC charges
pending further study. It will be necessary to determine
the appropriateness of increasing SAC charges to raise money
to pay the increasing debt service expenses which will
result from additional bond issues. A decision on whether
to increase SAC charges for this and other reasons will
probably not be made until 1982 or 1983.
He said that the MC has not yet decided what role it feels
it should play in reviewing the operating expenses of the
1~16JCC .
He said that both the MC and the DZWCC were disappointed that
there was not morefmunicipal participation before the PCA on
the hearings concerning advanced waste treatment. Members
of the Board indicated that the municipalities were not well
advised on the issues involved in the case and did not have
the expertise or funding which would permit them to play an
active role.
P•Ir. Dorton indicated that the EPA would continue to press.
for advance waste treatment facilities and that it could
prove very helpful if the municipalities would be able to
involve themselves in future proceedings involving such
proposals.
-8-
At the conclusion of the com-nents of blr. Weaver and Mr.
Dorton, the members of the Board discussed what the appro-
priate response might be to the expressed need for municipal
involvement in matters involving the capital and operating
budgets of the MWCC.
I4r. DeGhetto indicated that the Metropolitan League of
Municipalities has a Metropolitan Agencies Committee on
which he serves. This committee is interested in whatever
actions the SRA may take with reference to the Mwcc and its
rates and charges. He requested that the attorney advise
Mr. Verne Peterson of any decisions made by the SRA at this
meeting.
D'Ir. Darr expressed concern about the fact that the MC is
unable to marshal the expertise necessary to provide an
adequate review of M[aCC capital and operating budgets. He
and other members of th'e Board expressed the view that the
SRA would not be able to conduct an adequate budget review.
He advocated authorizing the SRA to involve itself in mat-
ters involving the MWCC but suggested that such involvement
would, for budgetary reasons, of necessity be a limited
involvement. The SRA would probably have to confine itself
to adopting resolutions, providing testimony, appearing at
some hearings and taking positions on issues which may arise
in connection with MCC operations.
After further discussion, it was moved by Mr. Norberg,
seconded by Mr. Dalen that the Board of Directors of the SPu'~
recommend to the SRA's members that they adopt an amendment
to the SRA's Joint Power Agreement which would permit the
SRA to involve itself in matters relating to the MWCC.
Carried unanimously.
In response to Mr. DeGhetto's suggestion, it was agreed that
b1r. Peterson of the League of Metropolitan Municipalities be
advised of this action and that he should receive copies of
those mailings of the SRA that are sent to SRA members.
Mr. Weaver indicated that he would send the SRA attorneys a
proposed resolution which could be adopted by individual SRA
members which would lend support to the positions taken by
the MC at the PCA hearings.
10. Adjournment: There being no further business to
come before the meeting, it was moved by Mr. Boeck, seconded
by T•Ir. Norberg that the meeting be adjourned. Carried
unanimously.
ATTEST:
Secretary
Chairman
Treasurer's Report attached.
-9-
4
SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
ANALYSIS OF CHANGE IN CASH BALANCE
SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
For Six Months Ended June 30, 1980
Balance at January 1, 1980
Additions:
Sale of Investments
Interest Income
Deductions:
Surety Bond $ 125.00
Investments Purchased 28,463.40
LeFevere, Lefler, Pearson, O'Brien & Drawz
Legal Services 2;145.83
Other 23.25
BALANCE JUNE 30, 1980
$19,951.84
3,085.16' 23,037.00
35,766.35
$12,729.35
30,757.48
c~ G nnn n']
INVESTMENTS
Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds 12.80%
Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds 11.30
Federal Land Bank Bonds 8.85
U.S. Treasury Bills 11.05
Federal Farm Credit r
Bank Bonds 10.00
Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds 10.95
Due 10-1-80
Due 7-1-80
Due 7-20-80
Due 1-2-81
Due 1-2-81
Due 10-20-82
$ 5,000.00
20,031.25
4,010.00
13,463.40
42,000.00
10,000.00
~nw cnw /C
FACE VALUE $95,000.00
- AMENDMENT
TO THE
JOINT AND COOPERATI~T AGREEP-~NT
I. PARTIES
The parties to this agreement are govern*ental units of
. the State of Minnesota. This agreement is made pursuant to
i~iin nesota Statutes, Section 471. 59, as amended. •
• II. GEi~ERAL PURPOSE
The general purpose of this agreement is to establish an
organization to monitor' the operation and activates of public
utili ties in the metropolitan area; to conduct research and
investigation of the activities of such utilities; and to conduct
such other activities authorized herein as may be necessary to
insure ecuitable and reasonable public utility rates and service
le~Jels for the citizens of the members of the orga-r~ization. .
III. NAP~LE
The name of the organization is the SUBUP,BA~I RATE AUT"r~ORITY.
The name may be changed in accordance with Article III.
IV. DEFIIIITIOi~TS ~ .
Section 1. For purposes of this agreement, the terms
defined in this article have the meaning given them. .
Section 2. "~1ut-ho?-ity" means the joint and cooperative
or.nanization crated by this agreement.
Section 3. "Board" or "Board of Directors" means the Board
of Directory of the Authority established by Article VI.
. Section 4. "Cot:ncil" means the governing, body of a
governaental unit.
Section 5. "Governmental Unit" means a city or town in
the metropolitan area.
Section 6. "Metropolitan Area" means the metropolitan
area defined and described by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter:
473B.02, as amended.
Section 7. "Member" means a governmental unit-which has
entered into and become a party to this agreement.
Section 8. "Public Utility" or "Utility" means an investor
owned utility supplying gas or electricity under franchise
within one or more governmental units; the term may include
other utilities as provided in Article XII. The term also
includes the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission ("M[^7CC").
The term does not include municipally owned utilities
Section 9. "Statutory Cities" means cities organized under
:•linnesota Statute, Chapter 412.
V. MEMBERSHIP
Section 1. Any governmental unit in the metropolitan area
is eligible to be a member of the Authority.
Section 2. A governmental unit desiring to become a member
shall er:ecute a copy of this agreement and conform to the member-
ship provisions of Article VII.
Section 3. The initial members shall be those members who
become members on or before January 1, 1975.
Section 4. Governmental units wishing to become members
after 3anuary 1, 1975, may be admitted only upon the favorable
vote of two-thirds of the votes of the members of the Board of
Directors. The Board may, in its by-laws, impose conditions
upon the admission of additional members.
-2-
Section 5. A change in the governmental boundaries, struc-
ture, classification or organization of a governmental unit
affects the eligibility of a unit to become a member of the ..
Authority.
VT. GOVERi~ITNG BODL': BOARD OF DTRECTOP.S •
Section 1. The governing body of the Authority is its
Board of Directors. Each member is entitled to one director on
the Board. Each director is entitled to one vote for each S,OOfl
of population or fractibn thereof of the goverr.-nental unit
represented by the director; provided, however, that each
director shall have at least one vote and no director sha 11 have
more than 20 votes. For purposes of this ..section., population of a
goverrL^ental unit shall b e that population determined pursuant
to the provisions of rlinnesota Statute 275.53. Prior to December
31 of each year, the Secretary-Treasurer of the Authority shall
deterrnine the population of each member in accordance with
this section and certify the results to the chairman.
Section 2. A director shall be appointed by resolution of
the council of the members for a term of one calendar year. A
director shall serve until his successor is appointed and
qualifies. Directors shall serve without compensation from the
1uthority, but nothing in this section shall be construed to
prevent a governmental unit from compensating its director for
service on the Board if such compensation is otherwise authorized
by la,a.
Section 3. The Board, in its by-laws, may provide for the
appoint~:ent of alternate directors and prescribe the e~:tent of ,
their po:•;ers and duties. •~
-3-
- Section 4. Vacancies in the office of director will exist
for any of the reasons set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section
351.02, or upon a revocation of a director's appointment by a
member duly filed with the Authority. Vacancies shall be filled
by ap~~oint:~:ent for the unexpired portion of the term of director
b:~ the council of the member ~-chose position on the Board is vacant.
Section 5. A majority of the votes of the Board of
Directors constitutes a quorum, but a smaller nu~•nber may adjourn
from ti:az to time.
VII. NiEETINCS - ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Section 1. A governmental unit may enter into this
agreer.;ent by resolution of its council and the duly authorized
e;•:ecution of a copy of this by its proper officers. Thereupon,
{
tl:e cler:; or other appropriate cfficer of the governmental unit
shall file the executed copy of the agreement and a certified
copy o~ the authorizing resolution with the city manager of the
City of Colu.^nbia Heights, Minnesota. The resolution authorizing
t:;e e;:ecution of the agrcerrent shaJ_1 also designate the first
c:irectcr for the governmental unit on the Board.
Section 2. This agreement is effective on the date when
e;:ecutive agreements and authorizing resolutions of seven
}
governracntal units presently members of the existing Suburban
hate T:utlior.it.y have been filed as provided in Section ~. of this
I~r'tic].c .
Section 3. Within thirty days after the effective date of
this agreement, the riayor •of the member having the largest
po_~ulation shall call the first n;eeting of the Board of Directors
-4-
cahich shall be held no later than 15 days after such ca11.
Section 4. The first meeting of the Board shall be the
organizational meeting of the Authority. At the organizational
meeting, and at each annual meeting thereafter, the Board shall
select from among the directors a chairman,.a vice-chairman,
and a secretary-treasurer.
_ Section 5. At the organizational meeting, or as soon there-
- after as it may reasonably be done, the Board shall adopt by-lat•,rs
governing its procedures, including the time, place, nctice~for_
and frequency of its regular meetings, procedure for calling
special meetings, and such other matters as are required by
this agree„ent. The Board may amend the by-laws from time to
t ~tirle. The Board shall meet at least once each year and on such
ot~er dates as may be provided in its by-la:•rs .
VIII. P04;ERS AIQD DUTIES OP TiiE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
. Section 1. The pot•~ers and duties of the Board of Directors
of the AutroriL-y are set forth in this article.
Section 2. The Board may make such contracts and enter
into such agreements as it deems necessary to make effective.:
any no•,~er granted to the Authority by this agreement. .It may
contract with any }of its members or others to provide space,
services or materials on behalf of 'the Authority.
Section 3. It may provide for the prosecution, defense,
or oLh;~r participation in actions or proceedings at la;•: in which
it may have an interest, and may employ counsel for that purpose.
7t may emnlo~~ such other persons as it deems necessary to accc:,:plisil
its po•.~ers and duties. Such employees may be on a full-time or
-5-
part-ti^;c, or consuli:ing basis as the Board determines, and the
Board r.;ay mare any required employer contributions which local
go~~~~rn:::ent units are authorized or required to mane by lava.
Section 4. It may conduct such research and investigation
ar.3 ta:e such action as it deems necessary,-including partici-
pation ar.d appearance in proceedings of state and federa l
regulatory, legislative or administrative bodies, on ary matter
related to or affecting utility costs, levels of service, rates
or ~_~::nc:!ises, and advise members concerning such matters ~~rith
a vie:~r te;~rard obtaining compliance ,with franchises granted to
utilities and-insuring reasonable rates and service levels
for the ,:.erbers and their residents. The Board may conduct the
,, activitics authorized by this section on behalf of any govern-
r,:en~al unit located outside the metropolitan area at the request
o~ suctz a u:iit, embodied in a resolution of its governing body;
prov~cied ho:rever, that the conduct of such activities on behalf
o~ an•~ such governmental unit shall be specifically authorized
by the Eoard and shall be subject to such reasonable conditions
as to cost of service and other matters as may be imposed by the
Loard.
Section 5. The Board may obtain from any utility and frem
any ot}:er source such information relating to utility rates, costs
and service levels as any of its members is entitled to obtain
frc::~ ::uch utilities.
Section G. It may receive and ho1.d moneys fro:a any utility
to tl;c c:;Cent and in the manner .as may be provided by this
-6-
agreement or any franchise granted to a utility by a mer;:ber; and
it r.;ay accept voluntary contributions from its members or other
sources as provided iri Article X. `1'he Authority shall have no
ta::ing' po~~er. It may accumulate reserve funds and may invest and
re-invest its funds not needed for_ current expenses in the manner
and subject to the limitations applicable by law to statutory
cities. The Board may not incur obligations in excess of funds
then available to Authority. ~ _
Section 7. The Board shall make a financial accounting
ar.d report to the members at least once each year. The books
and records of the Authority shall be open and available for
ins_»ection by members at all reasonable times.
Section 8. The,Board may accept gifts, apply for and use
~ grants of money or other property from members or other govern-
mental units or organizations, a.nd may enter into agreements
required in connection there~{rith, and may hold, use, and dispose
of such moneys or property in accordance with the terms of the
grant, gift or agreement relating thereto.
Section 9. The Board shall establish the annual budget for
the Authority as provided in Article X. -_
Section 10. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish an
executive committees and may delegate duties and authority to such
a committee between Board meetings.
Section 11. The Board may purchase public liability insura~;ce
and such other security bonds and insurance as it may deem
nc~essary.
' -7-
Section 12. The-Board may e:~ercise any other poorer necessary
and co;:venient to the implementation of the powers and duties
given to it by this agreement..
IY. OFFICERS
Section 1_ The officers of the Board shall 'consist of a
chairman, a vice-chairman, and a secretary-treasurer who shall be
_ elected by the Board, for a term of one year and until their
- successors ar_e elected and qualify, at the annual meeting. Neva
officers shall take office at the adjournm:nt of the annual meet-
i^~r, at ~•~hich they were elected. An officer must be a duly
qualiLied ~,nd appointed director.
Section 2. A vacancy ir. the office of chairman, vice-
cl:ai r.;an, or secretary-treasurer shall occur for any of the
reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director shall
occur. Vacancies in these offices shall be filled by the Board
for the une;:pined portion of the term.
Section 3. The chairman shall preside at all meetings of
the Board. The vice-chairman shall act as chairman in the absence,
disqualification or disability of the chairman.
Section 4. The secretary-treasurer is responsible for keep-
inc; a record of alfl the proceedings of the Board, for custody of
all funda, for }seeping of all financial records of the Authority
and for :.uch other duties as may be assigned to him by the Board.
Porsc;~s rlay be employed to perform such services under his super-
vision ~znd direction. as may be authorized by the Board. The
secret.a~y-treasurer sh~lll post a fidelity bond or other insurance
-8-
against loss of Authority funds in the account specified by the
Board. The cost of such bond or insurance shall be paid by the
Board. The Board may provide for compensation of the secretary-
treasurer for his services.
1. FIIQTu\?CIP.L P~LATT~RS
Section 1. The fiscal year of the Authority is the calendar
year.
Section 2. Authority funds may be upended in accordance-
with the procedures established by law for statutory cities.
Orders, checks and drafts shall be signed by the chairman. and
countersigned by the secretary-treasurer or such other person as
may be~designated by the Board in its by-laws. Other legal
instru~^ents shall•be executed on behalf of the Authority by
the chairman and the secretary-treasurer. Contracts shall be
let and purchases made in accordance with the procedures
established by la~v for statutory ci-cies.
Section ~. The activities of the Authority shall be •
financed by funds available to it under Article 1II, from •
voluntary contributions from its members or from other sources,
and by contributions from memJ~ers of the Authority if it is
deL-er:nined by Chet}3oard by a two-thirds vote of all votes of
then c::i~ting members, that such contributions are necessary.
Such dcterrnination shall be made by the Hoard not later than
I~uyust 1 ef: each year in order to obligate members to ma:;e -
contributions during the ensuing calendar. year. The total annual
contribution by me~,~ber~ for the ensuing year s}1a11 be established
- -9-
by tl:e hoard on the basis to anticipated expenditures and only
if the anticipated expenditures are in excess of the anticipated
... .. ,-
fund~ otherwise ;to the Authori•t~=. The contribution in any year
b,= a mer.;~er shall be in direct proportion to the nu~m~ber of votes
to cahich t}Ze director representing the member on the Board is
.entitled. Such contributions shall be made by the member to~
_ the Authority as follo~•:s: One-half on or before .February 1 of
each year and one-half on o.r before August 1 of each year.
Secticn ~}. An annual budget shall be adopted by the Board
at the organizational meeting and at the annual meeting each
year. Copies of the budget shall be mailed promptly to the
chief adr~linistrative office of each raernber. ^1 he budget is deer;:ed
i approved by the members except one who, at any time prior to
the annual meeting gives notice in writing to the secretary-
Measurer that it is withdra~•~ing from the Authority.
XI. DURATIOi1 A:'~1D DISSOLUTIOI:T
Secticn 7.. The Authority shall exist,-and this agreement
i~ in effect, for an indefinite term until dissolved in
accordance with Section 3 of_ this article.
Section 2. A member may withdraw from the Authority by
filing a ~•~ritten notice wiL-h the secretary-treasurer by June 15
oL- a:iy year giving notice of wi.thclratlal at the end of that
calenc'_~:,r year; and r,iemhership shall continue until the effective
date oi~ tilc ~•~ithdra~~~al. A notice of withdra~:~al-- may be rescinded
at any tir:c by a member. If a meiuLer wi_thdra~as before dissolu-
ticn of the Authority, the men,l~er shall have no claim on the
a~~ets of the Au~hority.
-10-
-, '~
Section 3. The Authority shall be dissolved whenever the
withdrawal of a member reduces total membership in the Authority
to less than the number of members required for organization of
the Authority under Article VII, Section 2. The Authority may
be dissolved at any time by unanimous vote of all the members
of the Board of Directors.
Section 4. In the evert of dissolution, the Board shall
determine the measures necessary to affect the dissolution and
shall provide for the taking of such measures as promptly as
circumstances permit, subject to the provisions of this .
agreement. Upon dissolution of the Authority all remaining
assets of the Authority, .after payment of obligations, shall be
` distributed among the then existing members in proportion to
the number of their votes on the Board and in accordance with
procedures established by the Board. The Authority shall
continue to exist after dissolution for such period, no longer
than six months, as is necessary to wind up its affairs but for
no other purpose.
XII. TRANSITIONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS
Section 1. The activities of the Authority shall be con-
fined to the Mace a,nd gas and electric utilities, provided however,
that the Authority may extend and broaden its activities to any
other public utility as defined in this agreement by a 75~ major_ity
vote of all the votes of the Board of Directors, taken at a
regular meeting of the Board. In the event the activities of
the Authority are so extended and broadened, the Authority and
-11-
'~' . r
its Board of Directors shall have all of the powers and duties
with reference to any other publ"ic utility that it has with
reference to the r~It~7CC and gas and electric utilities under this
agreement.
Section 2. The name of the organization created by this
agreement may be changed when deemed appropriate by.the Boar. d,
but only upon a 75o majority vote of all the votes of the Board
of Directors taken at a'regular meeting of the Board. If the
name of the organization is so changed, the Board shall provide
in its by-laws for necessary measures to effect the change in
official and unofficial documents, papers, .and other essential
respects.
Section 3. It is the intention of the-parties to t.h?.5
agreement that the organization created thereby is -'~,.=_.
successor to the Suburban Rate Authority now in existence.
It is further the intention of the parties that any funds made
available to the organization created by the agreement frori
assets of the present Suburban Rate Authority shall be used
e::clusively for the purposes of this agreement.
I;] ;FITNESS WHF~2EOF, the undersigned governmental unit
has caused this agreement to be executed by its duly authorized
officers and delivered on its behalf.
-12-
.. .i ;
X
I:Z the presence of:
{Governmental Unit)
Ey Zts
By Its
19
19~
' -13-
D~:~~d.
riled in ti-~.e of_ice of
day of
th~~