Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 03-22 CCP Regular Session AGENDA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION March 22, 2004 6:00 RM. City Council Chambers 1. City Council discussion of agenda items and questions 2. Miscellaneous 3. Adjourn CITY COUNCIL MEETING Public Copy City of Brooklyn Center March 22, 2004 AGENDA 1. Informal Open Forum With City Council 6:45 p.m. provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made but rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation 7 p.m. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting -The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. 4. Roll Call 5. Pledge of Allegiance 6. Council Report 7. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda -The following tems are considered to be routine b the City Co uncil and will be enacted o g Y Y by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes Councilmembers not present at meetings will be recorded as abstaining from the vote on the minutes. 1. March 1, 2004 Work Session 2. March 8, 2004 Study Session 3. March 8, 2004 Regular Session b. Licenses C. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids, Improvement Project Nos. 2004 -01, 02, 03, and 04, Northport Area Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- March 22, 2004 8. Public Hearing a. An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Utility and Drainage Easement within the Final Plat for Tanami 2 nd Addition -This item was approved for first read on February 9, 2004; published in the official newspaper on February 19, 2004; and is offered this evening for second reading and public hearing. Requested Council Action: Motion to open Public Hearing. -Take public input. Motion to close Public Hearing. Motion to adopt ordinance. 9. Council Consideration Items a. Proclamation Declaring April 4 -10, 2004, to be Community Development Week Requested Council Action: Motion to adopt proclamation. b. Proclamation Declaring April 18 Through April 25, 2004, as Days of Remembrance -Requested Council Action: Motion to adopt proclamation. C. Proclamation Declaring April 17 24, 2004, to be The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week Requested Council Action: Motion to adopt proclamation. d. Mayoral Appointment to Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission -Requested Council Action: Motion to ratify Mayoral nomination. e. Resolution Directing Staff to Prepare a Boulevard Tree Replacement Plan for the 2004 Construction Project to Include Coniferous Trees Requested Council Action: Motion to adopt resolution. f. Resolution Selecting the No Waiver Option for City Statutory Tort Liability -Requested Council Action: Motion to adopt resolution. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- March 22, 2004 g. Three -Meter Diving Board at Community Center -Requested Council Action: Motion to direct removal of the three -meter diving board. h. An Ordinance Amending Section 4 -202 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center Regarding a Sprinkling Ban Requested Council Action: Council discussion. Motion to approve first reading and set second reading and public hearing on April 26, 2004. 10. Adjournment City Council Agenda Item No. 7a MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MARCH 1, 2004 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Work Session and was called to order by Mayor Kragness at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, Diane Niesen, and Bob Peppe. Also present: City Manager Michael McCauley, Assistant City Manager/Director of Operations Curt Boganey, Community Development Director Brad Hoffman, Fiscal and Support Services Director Dan Jordet, and City Clerk Sharon Knutson. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING City Manager Michael McCauley displayed a PowerPoint presentation to provide an overview of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and its uses and general requirements and the TIF districts within Brooklyn Center. He explained that the purpose of the meeting was for the Council to review TIF and TIF districts, to discuss a broad picture of potential projects and identify any other potential projects, to develop a focus and direction for economic development in TIF District #3, and to provide staff with a more specific range of potential projects to be considered so that funding options and ballpark cost scenarios can be compiled for review at the April 12 Council Work Session. Mr. McCauley outlined what staff has been working on, including accounting for TIF and projecting budget scenarios, working with bond counsel to review plans, budgets, and potential options for projects, and working with Dan Vang in the Northbrook area and potential Little Asia site. He said Planning and Zoning Specialist Ron Warren is reviewing uses in the Opportunity Site and working on developing a Central Business District zone. Mr. McCauley explained whao TIF does, in that it uses increased taxes from redevelopment to fund activities necessary to facilitate that redevelopment. He noted that Regal Theaters, Holiday Commissary, and the Cub Foods development were not TIF projects, however, they are in TIF districts and the increment is. captured in the TIF district. He reviewed the four TIF districts in Brooklyn Center and discussed the projects completed within each of the districU as follows: 03/01/04 -1- DRAFT TIF #1 Housing along Lilac Drive TIF #2 Redevelop Earle Brown Heritage Center and surrounding area and create housing g g g Mr. McCauley noted that laws have changed since the projects in TIF District #2 were completed, and some of the work that was done would not be allowed under the new laws. He discussed the potential hotel development and the use of TIF to assist, whether it is generated from TIF 92 or TIF #3 as part of the 25% out of district allowance. There was discussion about making the connection from the hotel to the Earle Brown Heritage Center and that portion would not be eligible for TIF. TIF 3 Country Inn Suites utility line relocation Sunlite Warehouse soil correction Global Showroom warehouse soil correction 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard Brookdale development agreement with Talisman; pay as you go note TH 252 removal of motel, apartments, replaced with housing development Joslyn Phase III (outside TIF District 43) Councilmember Niesen inquired if the number of districts in Brooklyn Center is three or four, since TIF #1 merged with TIF 42. Community Development Director Brad Hoffman explained there are four, but no activities are planned in TIF #l, however it continues to capture increment until 2006 when it would be closed. TIF #4 Joslyn soils district; Mr. McCauley noted that $1 Million from TIF #3 was used in Phase III. There was discussion regarding the budget for TIF districts and how it is established. Mr. McCauley explained that a public hearing is held to establish or amend TIF districts, including compiling a spending plan which is based on how much increment the development will capture. Mr. Hoffman explained that TIF #3 is a very large district, the length is longer, and it was created to address the large redevelopment needs of the future, which is now. He said there are some areas in TIF #3 that don't have a qualifying improvement/activity and those areas will drop from the district. He explained that 25% can be used outside of the district and it does not have to be in a TIF district, but TIF #3 would not receive any increment from that 25 Mr. McCauley discussed some of the basic issues with TIF #3, the first of which is the current deadline for qualified expenditures in early 2005; however, the City is seeking special legislation for a three -year extension. He also discussed development requirements, whether to wait for a 03/01/04 -2- DRAFT development or proceed to clear a site for redevelopment without a development plan in hand. There was discussion regarding developers who want to develop without using TIF and its impacts. Mr. McCauley explained that if a developer builds a project in a TIF district and does not use TIF funds, the increment is still captured on the improvement. There was discussion regarding acquiring properties for redevelopment and removing them from the tax rolls and its effect on property taxes. Mr. McCauley reviewed the uses of tax increment in TIF #3, which include acquisition of property, demolition of structures, soil corrections, utility work or construction, road construction, sidewalks, parking facilities, and administration. Mr. McCauley then reviewed the prohibited uses of tax increment in TIF #3, which include government buildings; primarily aesthetic ox, decorative construction; common areas used as a public park, social, recreational, or conference facilities (doesn't apply to privately owned conference); and property acquisitions in excess of 25% of acreage in the district without a recourse development agreement. He said some streetscape can be done using TIF, however, you cannot do more aesthetic improvements than 100% more than the cost of usual materials or designs. Mr. McCauley reviewed a list of potential projects in the TIF districts as follows: Acquisition and demolition of Northbrook Acquisition of properties across from Northbrook Acquisition of Brookdale Ford NW quadrant of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard Additional improvements at Brookdale Improvement of Xerxes from Hwy. 100 to Summerchase St. Alphonsus housing Mr. McCauley noted that another potential project could be the acquisition and demolition of Summerchase Apartments. He said the legal opinion is that if we condemn the property, then the tax credits will go away. Mr. McCauley provided rough acquisition points for the potential projects within TIF #3 as well as Brookdale Square and the K -Mart site, which are outside the district. He said the current budget for TIF #3 is $31,900,000, and discussed the rough increment ranges, including cash available with Brookdale and without. He explained the rough gross increments are based on assumptions that there will be no change in valuation, no change in class rates, and no change in tax rates below certification year. He reviewed the situation with TIF #2 in which the class rate dropped from 4% to 2% creating a deficit in TIF #2. There was discussion regarding thif maximum amount that can be spent in TIF #3 and whether or not any of the money should be reserved. Mr. McCauley outlined the Opportunity Site and reviewed the illustrative plans drawn by Calthorpe Associates. He discussed a potential amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to allow housing. He explained that certain definitions for permissible types of housing could be included, such as size 03/01/04 -3- DRAFT requirements, parking requirements (i.e., underground), market -rate with some low- to moderate- income scattered housing, along with zoning regulations. He passed out a more generic overview of two areas prepared by Calthorpe. He explained the broad plan focuses more on types of uses in larger areas without breaking each area down into small sections. There was discussion regarding the Town Center concept, the importance of creating a synergy between the Brookdale area and the area north of Bass Lake Road and east along Shingle Creek Parkway, avoiding creating a disjointed type of development such as it is now, and the percent of affordable housing necessary to comply with livable communities requirements. Councilmember Carmody noted that she is not in favor of acquiring and demolishing Summerchase if it means that low- income housing will need to be replaced into the area east of Shingle Creek Parkway, which is in the Brooklyn Center"School District. There was Council consensus to proceed with the Town Center and Retail Center concept in the Opportunity Site. Council discussed the potential projects, noting the following comments: n The following projects are all located within the Opportunity Site and efforts should be concentrated on these areas without a development plan: Acquisition and demolition of Northbrook Acquisition of properties across from Northbrook Acquisition of Brookdale Ford Additional improvements at Brookdale Improvement of Xerxes from Hwy. 100 to Summerchase The following projects can be put on hold, unless a developer approaches the City with a plan: NW quadrant of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard 70th and Brooklyn Boulevard acquisition of houses St. Alphonsus housing Council discussed acquisition of Summerchase and agreed to include it in the list of potential projects to concentrate efforts. Councilmember Niesen raised the issue of daylighting Shingle Creek through the Brookdale parking lot, including parking lot improvements. Mr. McCauley discussed that the concept would need to be compatible with the owner of Brookdale, as it would remove necessary parking requirements for Brookdale and an alternative plan for replacement parking would need to be designed. It was Council consensus that for the April 12th Work Session the project area for staff to develop rough fiscal scenarios regarding capacities to be considered for prioritization, along with developing a range of funding options, be the corridor from Xerxes Avenue east along Bass Lake Road to 03/01/04 -4- DRAFT Northbrook, including Summerchase. There was a brief discussion regarding the option of closing a TIF district and creating a new one. Mr. McCauley explained creating a new TIF district would be an expensive process and the City would need to identffy findings and qualified activities /improvements. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adjourn the Work Session at 8:31 p.m. passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor 03/01/04 -5- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MARCH 8, 2004 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER STUDY SESSION The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Diane Niesen, and Bob Peppe. Councilmember Kay Lasman was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Michael McCauley, Assistant City Manager/Director of Operations Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Todd Blomstrom, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Council discussed agenda items 10c, An Ordinance Amending Section 19 -403 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center Regarding the Sale and Use of Fireworks;1 Oe, Resolution Approving Environmental Response Fund Grant Agreement Between the City of Brooklyn Center and Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services; and l Ob, Resolution Amending the Schedule for Rental Dwelling License Fees. Councilmember Peppe informed that he was not comfortable with the proposed rental dwelling license fees and would like more information regarding the inspection costs. City Manager Michael McCauley suggested that the item be tabled during the regular meeting to obtain more information. DISCUSSION OF ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON MARCH 22, 2004, WORK SESSION AGENDA Mr. McCauley discussed the items included in the materials for discussion at the March 22, 2004, Work Session and inquired if the Council had other items to be added. Councilmember Carmody expressed that she would like to have the taxicab ordinance on the March 22, 2004, agenda. MISCELLANEOUS Council discussed the recent deer hunt process and letters that the Mayor received from the Brooklyn Park Youth Hockey Association and the Gay and Lesbian Pride Association. 03/08/04 -1- DRAFT Councilmember Niesen expressed that she would like to know the total cost per deer for future deer hunts. Mr. McCauley informed that at this time the request from the Brooklyn Park Youth Hockey Association to place pull -tabs at the old Chi -Chi's Restaurant in Brooklyn Center would be premature since no permit has been pulled for a new establishment. Councilmember Niesen requested copies of the letter received from the Gay and Lesbian Pride Association for further review. ADJOURNMENT A motion by Councilmember Carmi3dy, seconded by Councilmember Niesen to adjourn the Study Session at 6:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor S 03/08/04 -2- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MARCH 8, 2004 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS L INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Diane Niesen, and Bob Peppe. Councilmember Kay Lasman was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Michael McCauley, Assistant City Manager/Director of Operations Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Todd Blomstrom, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. Rex Newman, 3107 61" Avenue North, addressed the Council to inform that he would like to comment on Council Consideration Item l Oa, Resolution to Oppose Tax and Expenditure Limitation Proposals (TaBOR and Similar Proposals). Mayor Kragness stated that he would have an opportunity to comment on the item during PP Y the regular meeting. g g 2. INVOCATION Mary Kay Pearce, St. Alphonsus Faith Formation Commission, offered the Invocation. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:02 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Diane Niesen, and Bob Peppe. Councilmember Kay Lasman was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Michael McCauley, City Manager/Director er/Direc Y, ty g for of Operations Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Todd Blomstrom, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. 03/08/04 -1- DRAFT 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Carmody reported that she attended the League of Minnesota Cities State of the Cities Conference. Councilmember Niesen discussed a report that she had received regarding select criminal conduct and provided the Website for Hennepin County if persons wanted more information. Mayor Kragness discussed the Marshall Field's Community Giving Program and informed that if persons wanted more information on the program to contact Marshall Field's. 7. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA There was a motion by Councilmember Niesen, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to approve the agenda and consent agenda with the amendment of removing Consent Item 7h, Resolution Requesting Variance from Standards for State Aid Operations, Halifax Avenue North and Eckberg Drive (S.A.P. 109 105 -03) to Council Consideration Item 10h. Motion passed unanimously. 7a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion by Councilmember Niesen, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to approve the February 23, 2004, study, regular, and work session minutes. Mayor Kragness abstained. Motion passed. 7b. LICENSES A motion by Councilmember Niesen, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to approve the following list of licenses. Motion passed unanimously. MECHANICAL Lux Company 5217 84th Avenue North, Brooklyn Park RENTAL Initial: 201255 th Avenue North Jason Cramer 2907 64 Avenue North Laurel Igbanngo 4306 66 Avenue North Alexander Lakanu 5834 Aldrich Avenue North Paul Scully 3618 Commodore Drive Tou Thao 5137 5139 France Avenue North Chris Plourde 5528 Humboldt Avenue North Michael Justin 03/08/04 -2- DRAFT 5701 James Avenue North Victor Shkaberin 6330 Kyle Avenue North Daniel Lu 4207 Lakeside Avenue North #226 Beach Condo's Association 6926 West River Road Mark Pivec Renewal: 2307 2309 54 Avenue North Robert Messersmith 3819 France Place Robert Lindahl 6753 Humboldt Avenue North Suburban Properties 5338 Queen Avenue North Robert Messersmith 5301 -05 Russell Avenue North Korey Bannerman 3206 Thurber Road Mainsl Properties 7e. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004-09,2004 STREET SEAL COATING RESOLUTION NO. 2004-33 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AUTHORIZING AWARD OF A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004-09,2004 STREET SEAL COATING The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 7d. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004 -06, CONTRACT 2004 -C, 73RD AVENUE NORTH STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 2004-34 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004 -06, CONTRACT 2004 -C, 73RD AVENUE NORTH STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 03/08/04 -3- DRAFT 7e. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004 -06, CONTRACT 2004 -C, 73RD AVENUE NORTH STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -35 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2004 -06, CONTRACT 2004 -C, 73RD AVENUE NORTH STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 7f. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL AT 6712 WEST RIVER ROAD, MISSISSIPPI RIVERBANK PROTECTION PROJECT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999-11 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-36 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following esolution and moved its adoption: g P RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR TREE REMOVAL AT 6712 WEST RIVER ROAD, MISSISSIPPI RIVERBANK PROTECTION PROJECT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1999 -11 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 7g. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2003 -01, 02, 03 AND 04, CONTRACT 2003 -A, HAPPY HOLLOW STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -37 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2003- 01, 02, 03 AND 04, CONTRACT 2003 -A, HAPPY HOLLOW STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 03/08/04 -4- DRAFT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 7h. RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE FROM STANDARDS FOR STATE AID OPERATIONS, HALIFAX AVENUE NORTH AND ECKBERG DRIVE (S.A.P.109- 105 -03) This item was removed and placed on Council Consideration as item 10h. 8. APPEARANCES 8a. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ASHLEE KEPHART AS A DISTINGUISHED FINALIST IN THE PRUDENTIAL SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY AWARDS Mayor Kragness read and presented a resolution recognizing Ashlee Kephart as a distinguished finalist in the Prudential Spirit of Community Awards. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -38 Councilmember Peppe introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ASHLEE KEPHART AS A DISTINGUISHED FINALIST IN THE PRUDENTIAL SPIRIT OF COMMUNITY AWARDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. 8b. PROCLAMATION DECLARING MARCH 2004 TO BE MINNESOTA FOODSHARE MONTH Mayor Kragness read and presented a Proclamation Declaring March 2004 to be Minnesota FoodShare Month to Steve Kline, Executive Director of Community Emergency Assistance Program (CEAP). A motion by Councilmember Niesen, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to adopt Proclamation Declaring March 2004 to be Minnesota FoodShare Month. Motion passed unanimously. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS 9a. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004 -01, 02, 03, AND 04, NORTHPORT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 03/08/04 -5- DRAFT 1. RESOLUTION ORDERING IlVIPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004 -01, 02, 03, AND 04, CONTRACT 2004 -A, NORTHPORT AREA STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 2. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004 -01 AND 2004 -02, CONTRACT 2004 -A, NORTHPORT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS Public Works Director /City Engineer Todd Blomstrom provided a PowerPoint overview of the project including the project determination factors, proposed improvements, budget, funding, special assessment payment options, preliminary project schedule, and sources of project information. Councilmember Niesen expressed concern about the timing of this project and the Highway 100 project and inquired if the City is coordinating with the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). Mr. Blomstrom discussed that the contractor will be coordinating with Mn/DOT to ensure that residents will be able to et in and out of their proper erties. He identified that there will be g P P difficult times for property owners; however, the goal is to have the property owners able to get to and from their properties throughout the project. Councilmember Niesen q uestioned if 50` Avenue would continue to be a route residents will be able to use during construction. Mr. Blomstrom responded that 50`" Avenue would remain open until France Avenue is open. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Jan Nyberg, 3824 Eckberg Drive, addressed the Council to question the current width for her street curb and utters /drivewa a and to express her concern with the trees. Mr. Blomstrom g Y apron P responded that the widths are currently approximately 28 feet on her street. Steve Kurvers, 5221 Drew Avenue North, addressed the Council to question access for emergency vehicles during construction. Mr. Blomstrom responded that one of the requirements of the contractor is to have access for emergency vehicles at all times during construction. Susan Niemi, 3 824 France Place, addressed the Council to express that she believes this project was poorly planned and questioned why staff did not wait until the Highway 100 construction project was completed. She expressed concern about the trees being removed and the garbage hauling services during construction. City Manager Michael McCauley discussed that the project was not in the plan until water quality issues were raised and those water quality issues were driving the timing of the project. 03/08/04 -6- DRAFT Mr. Blomstrom added that even though there is a mixture of good and bad water main pipes it is difficult to determine where the water main pipes are bad which creates replacement of all water main pipes in the area. Councilmember Carmody asked for clarification on the garbage and, mail service during construction. Mr. Blomstrom informed that those services would be coordinated during the construction. A resident in the 5700 Block of Drew Avenue North addressed the Council to question where they would be able to park their vehicles when they are not able to drive to their properties and how many days property owners will not be able to get to their properties. Mr. Blomstrom discussed that there will be a few days during the construction that property owners will not be able to get to their properties by vehicle and that they will have to park on a nearby street. The contractor will not be working on all streets at the same time and will coordinate to make sure that residents have a place to park their vehicles. Jim Mitchell, 3800 France Place, addressed the Council to express he believes that their water quality is fine and to question the access for residents during construction. Mr. Blomstrom discussed that this situation is unusual since only 50 percent of the residents in the area have water quality issues and that there will be some inconveniences for residents during the project; however, they will try and coordinate with Mn/DOT at all times during construction. Angela Mitchell, 3 800 France Place, addressed the Council to question the construction process as to why the streets are torn up, left a while, and then torn up again; and to express concern about her cobblestone driveway. Mr. Blomstrom discussed that the contractor stages the work and there is a rationale. For example water main is replaced and then followed later by sewer trenching. The trenches are in different locations. This results in going through the area for water and coming back for sewer. All of the utility work cannot be done at once and still maintain service to owners. Suzanne Herther, 3820 France Place, addressed the Council to express concern about the speed in her area with the wider road, question the assessment payoff process, and ask if the same types of trees could be replaced when trees are lost. Mr. Blomstrom discussed the issue of speed and that they could consider a type of Evergreen tree to the list for replacement trees. City Attorney Charlie LeFevere discussed that the payoff for assessments could be prepaid at anytime up until December, 2004. Payments received from October 1, 2004 to November 29, 2004, would be with interest calculated at 5.5 percent. Ms. Herther questioned if there would be any compensation for watering. Mayor Kragness discussed that a water truck will water the boulevards once the project is complete for a short period of time and after that the property owners are responsible for watering. Mr. Mitchell questioned if the residents could be notified in advance of things going on during construction. Mayor Kragness asked that Mr. Blomstrom ask the contractor to work with the residents on upcoming events during construction. 03/08/04 -7- DRAFT Bill Swanson, 5737 June Avenue North, addressed the Council to ask how far the contractor would be into the existing driveways and to express concern about all property owners being assessed the same when some properties are larger than others. Mr. Blomstrom responded that the contractor would be going approximately ten feet. Mr. McCauley discussed that most of the lots on an average are the same within the City. Mr. LeFevere added that avast majority of cities charge on a unit basis and that commercial usage is on a front footage basis. John Garton, 3919 58 Avenue North, addressed the Council to ask what will be done with those facing Bass Lake Road. Mr. Blomstrom responded that the work would not occur on Bass Lake Road itself. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. McCauley suggested that a revised tree replacement list be prepared for the March 22, 2004, meeting. Councilmember Carmody asked that the Mitchell's talk with Mr. Blomstrom regarding their cobblestone driveway. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -39 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004-01,02,03, AND 04, CONTRACT 2004 -A, NORTHPORT AREA STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-40 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004 -01 AND 2004 -02, CONTRACT 2004 -A, NORTHPORT AREA NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 03/08/04 -8- DRAFT gb. PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS, DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS, AND DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS 1. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 2. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 3. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS Mr. McCauley discussed that these re$oJutions would certify special assessments for unpaid balances for diseased tree removal costs, delinquent weed removal costs and delinquent public utility service q P h' accounts. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to open the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Kurvers addressed the Council to question the payoff process for delinquent public utility service accounts and express concern about not being able to pay them off in time due to his medical problems. Mr. McCauley discussed that the interest would start as of May 1, 2004, if not paid in full. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to close the Public Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -41 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -42 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO HE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS 03/08/04 -9- DRAFT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -43 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE TAX AND EXPENDITURE LIMITATION PROPOSALS (TABOR AND SIMILAR PROPOSALS) Mr. McCauley discussed that this resolution would oppose limits on State and/or local taxes and expenditures whether through constitutional amendment or other means and supports the principle of representative democracy as the best route to sound public policy. He informed that if this resolution were to be adopted it would be passed on to the City's Legislative representatives. Councilmember Peppe wished to comment that he supports to oppose for many reasons since Brooklyn Center is dealing with difficult times. Rex Newman, 3107 61" Avenue North, addressed the Council to discuss this issue with the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -44 Councilmember Niesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE TAX AND EXPENDITURE LIMITATION PROPOSALS (TABOR AND SIMILAR PROPOSALS) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Carmody. Motion passed unanimously. 10b. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE FEES A motion by Councilmember Peppe, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to table this item to a future Work Session to allow staff to provide additional information regarding inspection costs. Motion passed unanimously. 03/08/04 -10- DRAFT loc. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 19 -403 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER REGARDING THE SALE AND USE OF FIREWORKS Mr. McCauley discussed that this ordinance amendment to Section 19 -403 would remove the restrictive language from the City's ordinance to be in compliance with new Legislation and adds language that would require a license to sell consumer fireworks. He informed that the license requirement would enable the City to regulate sales of fireworks to ensure that the applicant is insured and in compliance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). Councilmember Niesen questioned how Subdivision 11, Revocation of License was prepared. Mr. McCauley discussed that the language reflects case law for due process; however, could be set up with a formal policy. Mr. LeFevere discussed the revocation and fundamental process. Councilmember Niesen expressed that she would like to have more specification or standard hearing process. A motion by Councilmember Niesen, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to approve first reading and set second reading and public hearing on April 12, 2004. Motion passed unanimously. 10d. AMEND 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE Mr. McCauley discussed that the Brooklyn Center School Board had invited the City Council to tour the new Earle Brown Elementary School on April 12, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. The scheduled Study Session on April 12, 2004, would need to be canceled. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to amend the 2004 City Council Meeting Schedule to cancel the Study Session at 6:00 p.m. on April 12, 2004, and replace it with the Earle Brown Elementary School tour. Motion passed unanimously. 10e. RESOLUTION APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES lof. RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY REGARDING WORK TO BE PERFORMED PURSUANT TO HENNEPIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND GRANT AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. A031917 03/08/04 -11- DRAFT Mr. McCauley discussed that this item and item l Of, Resolution Approving Agreements Between the City of Brooklyn Center and Barr Engineering Company Regarding Work to be Performed Pursuant to Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Grant Agreement Contract No. A031917, could be approved together since they both relate to the authorizing of agreements with the City for the Hmong American Shopping Center Project. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -45 Councilmember Carmody introduced the amended resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-46 Councilmember Carmody introduced the amended resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY REGARDING WORK TO BE PERFORMED PURSUANT TO HENNEPIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND GRANT AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. A031917 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. log. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN PHASE II DISPATCH STUDY WITH THE CITIES OF GOLDEN VALLEY, RICHFIELD, AND ST. LOUIS PARK Mr. McCauley discussed that this resolution would authorize the second phase for participation in the dispatch study with the cities of Golden Valley, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. Councilmember Niesen questioned how much had been paid already and what the second phase will accomplish. Mr. McCauley discussed that approximately $5,000 had been paid to this study and that the second phase would be a detailed study to review and make recommendations related to implementation planning for potential dispatch consolidation. Councilmember Niesen questioned if this would be the anticipated end to the costs for this study. Mr. McCauley discussed that he did not believe so since the need for this phase to move forward may create additional costs if it would appear feasible to continue. 03/08/04 -12- DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -47 Councilmember Carmody introduced the amended resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN PHASE lI DISPATCH STUDY WITH THE CITIES OF GOLDEN VALLEY, RICHFIELD, AND ST. LOUIS PARK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Niesen. Motion passed unanimously. 10h. RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE FROM STANDARDS FOR STATE AID OPERATIONS, HALIFAX AVENUE NORTH AND ECKBERG DRIVE (S.A.P. 109 105 -03) Mr. McCauley discussed that this request would obtain a variance from the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, pursuant to Minnesota Rules for State Aid Operations 8820.3300, as they apply to the proposed reconstruction of said intersection. Council discussed the possibility of placing two stop signs in the area instead of curve. It was determined that a safe curve would in the best interest of the residents. RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -48 Councilmember Carmody introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE FROM STANDARDS FOR STATE AID OPERATIONS, HALIFAX AVENUE NORTH AND ECKBERG DRIVE (S.A.P. 109 105 -03) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Peppe. Motion passed unanimously. 11. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to adjourn the City Council meeting at 9:31 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk Mayor 03/08/04 -13- DRAFT City Council Agenda Item No. 7b City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community O Revised TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk DATE: March 17, 2004 SUBJECT: Licenses for Council Approval The following companies /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each company /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on March 22, 2004. SIGNHANGER Crosstown Sign 16307 Aberdeen Street NE, Ham Lake Install This Awning Sign 53454 1h Street North, Brooklyn Center Lawrence Sign 945 Pierce Butler Route, St. Paul Leroy Signs, Inc. 6325 Welcome Avenue North, Brooklyn Park Signart Company 2170 Dodd Road, Mendota Heights Signcrafter's 7775 Main Street, Fridley Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. 5680 Flint Trail, Wyoming Topline Advertising 11775 Justen Circle, Maple Grove MECHANICAL AirCorps, LLC 13821 Industrial Park Boulevard, Plymouth Air Mechanical, Inc. 16411 Aberdeen Street NE, Ham Lake Alliant Mechanical, Inc. 3650 Kennebec Drive, Eagan Associate Mechanical 1257 Marshall Road, Shakopee Assured Heating A/C Refrig. 334 Dean Avenue East, Champlin Auto Garage Door Fireplace 9210 Wyoming Avenue North, Brooklyn Park Budget Home Services 13755 Buck Lake Boulevard, Big Lake Centraire Heating A/C 7402 Washington Avenue South, Eden Prairie Corporate Mechanical 5114 Hillsboro Avenue North, New Hope Cronstroms Heating A/C 6437 Goodrich Avenue, St. Louis Park Dave's Applicane Heating Air 1601 37 Avenue NE, Columbia Heights Dependable Indoor Quality Inc. 2619 Coon Rapids Blvd, Coon Rapids D J's Heating& Air Conditioning 6060 LaBeaux Avenue NE, Albertville Excel Air Systems 2075 Prosperity Road, Maplewood Fore Mechanical 3520 88 Avenue NE, Blaine Golden Valley Heating 5182 West Broadway, Crystal Guyer's Builder's Supply 13405 15 Avenue North, Plymouth Harris Companies 909 Montreal Circle, St. Paul Heating Cooling Two Inc. 18550 County Road 81, Maple Grove Hilliard Heating Cooling, Inc. 13790268 1h Avenue, Zimmerman Jome Energy System 15200 25 Avenue North, Plymouth 0 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org Page 2 Licenses March 22, 2004 Agenda MECHANICAL continued Kleve Heating and Air 13075 Pioneer Trail, Eden Prairie, Lux Company 521784 1h Avenue North, Brooklyn Park McDowall Company P.O. Box 1244, St. Cloud M D Plumbing Heating Inc. 11050 26h Street NE, St. Michael Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors 7340 Washington Avenue South, Eden Prairie Modern Heating A/C 2318 First Street NE, Minneapolis Northern Heating Air Conditioning 9431 Alpine Drive NW, Ramsey Quality Refrigeration 6237 Penn Avenue South, Richfield Ray Welter Heating Co 4637 Chicago Avenue South, Minneapolis Riccar Heating A/C 2387 Station Parkway NW, Andover River City Sheet Metal Inc. 9928 Bluebird Street NW, Coon Rapids I'con's Mechanical 12010 Old Brick Yard Road, Shakopee Rouse Mechanical 7320 Oxford Street, St. Louis Park Royalton Heating A/C 4120 85' Avenue North, Brooklyn Park Sedgwick Hearting A/C 8910 Wentworth Avenue South, Minneapolis Standard Heating A/C 410 W Lake Street, Minneapolis St. Marie Sheet Metal 7940 Spring Lake Park Road, Spring Lake Park Thermex Corporation 3529 Raleigh Avenue South, St. Louis Park Tropic Air Inc. 1302 190 Avenue NW, Cedar Wenzel Heating A/C 4131 Old Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan Yale Mechanical Inc. 9649 Girard Avenue South, Minneapolis RENTAL Renewal: Basswood Apartments, 4450 58' Avenue North (11 Units) Midwest Management 022904 Suspicious Activity 120503 Property Damage Motor Vehicle Accident 082103 Suspicious Activity 080803 Medical 062803 Medical 5200 France Avenue North Christian Knutson 101903 Disturbing the Peace 5400 -02 Russell Avenue North Bruce Karen Vanderschaaf 5400 Russell 102303 Recovered Stolen Property 5402 Russell 021104 Parking Violation 062903 Aid and Assist 051003 Found Bikes Initial: 390662 nd Avenue North Pao Thao 020504 Rules and Regs 032803 Aid and Assist 6213 Chowen Avenue North Nazneen Khatoon No calls 5937 Halifax Avenue North Nick Rierson No Calls City Council Agenda Item No. 7c Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2004 -01, 02, 03, AND 04, NORTHPORT AREA STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council on March 8, 2004, by Resolution No. 2004 -39 ordered Improvement Project Nos. 2004 -01, 02, 03, and 04, Northport Area Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements, and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications; and WHEREAS, staff under the direction of the City Engineer have prepared said plans and specifications. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. The plans and specifications for said improvement project are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids for the making of such improvements in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, shall specify the work to be done and shall state the time and location at which bids will be opened by the City Clerk and the City Manager or their designees. Any bidder whose responsibility is questioned during consideration of the bid will be given an opportunity to address the Council on the issue of responsibility. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Brooklyn Center for 5 percent of the amount of such bid. Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof. and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. XBR ty of KLYN MEMORANDUM TER DATE: March 16, 2004 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Todd Blomstrom, Director of Public Works lw SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids, Improvement Project Nos. 2004 -01, 02, 03, and 04, Northport Area Street, Storm Drainage, and Utility Improvements On March 8, 2004, the City Council conducted a series of two public hearing on the proposed Northport Area Street, Storm Drainage and Utility Improvements. The first hearing was to consider ordering the improvements and authorizing the development of plans and specifications. The second hearing was to consider certification of proposed special assessments for the improvement project. Following the public hearings, the City Council ordered the improvements and directed staff to prepare plans and specifications. Construction plans, specifications and contract documents have been completed for the Northport Area project. Staff is prepared to begin the project bidding process upon authorization from the City Council. The bidding process would involve advertisement of the project in the City's official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin magazine. Sealed bids would be collected, opened on a scheduled bid opening date, and tabulated by the City Clerk and City Engineer. Staff anticipates that the bid results will be presented to the City Council for consideration of the contract award at the April 26, 2004 City Council meeting. It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids. Detailed plan sheets will be available for review at the City Council meeting. City Council Agenda Item No. 8a CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 22nd day of March, 2004, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance vacating a portion of utility and drainage easement within the final plat for Tanami 2 Addition. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN THE FINAL PLAT FOR TANAMI 2 ND ADDITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A portion of utility and drainage easement as donated and dedicated on the record plat of TANAMI ADDITION, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: The westerly five (5) feet of Lot 2, Block 1 and the easterly five (5) feet of Lot 1, Block 1, adjoining said Lot 2 all in said TANAMI ADDITION; except the northerly ten (10) feet and southerly five (5) feet thereof. Section 2. Notwithstanding the legal description provided above, it is the express intent of the City not to vacate any street or utility easements dedicated to the public in the plat of TANAMI 2 ND ADDITION, as approved by Resolution No. 2003 -159. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2004. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Strikeouts indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) Cary of MEMORANDUM BROOKLYN CENTER DATE: March 16, 2004 TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Todd Blomstrom, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: An Ordinance Vacating a Portion of Utility and Drainage Easement within the Final Plat for Tanami 2 nd Addition On February 9, 2004, the City Council conducted a first reading of an ordinance to vacate a portion of utility and drainage easement within the plat for Tanami 2 "d Addition located south of 69`'' Avenue and west of Humboldt Avenue. The location of the proposed vacation is provided on the attached figure. KPM properties is requesting that the City vacate the utility and drainage easement located along a former property line that existed within the site prior to the property being re- platted in 2003. This is essentially an action to remove an easement that is no longer needed for public utilities or drainage. The subject easement would overlap the proposed townhome lots included in the final J p p p plat for Tanami 2" d Addition. Vacating the easement would assist in avoiding possible property title issues for the townhome lots in the future. Consistent with the City Charter, this item was first read on February 9, 2004, published in the official newspaper on February 19, 2004, and is presented for the second reading and public hearing by the City Council. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance. .IaPARro.aR: F \AV 2-nJ ADD 0\ W BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA z TRA,A,, IWmrpNrIMIK 89TH AVENUE NORTH nl.nlvi+. PSu`IW DRAWING INDEX VACINITY MAP G.l C A6 u G.1 EYJSTNO fb110t1%M1 p— N.La>[olm G.1 BITE UYOIR PUN _p.1.__ 1 __f T r n G.1 1 FWKpRA SE1g8gNCORiR�OL —_an I I rl III BLOCK 2 I _____L C6. PREMMINARY PLAT C..1 GMURYEEWERIWATE WCONETRIICTIONPLW f all i 11 I{ jy' fl TI+ f BTREETInTOM1 EEWER CCN6TRUCTICN MAII 1, i I I I II 1,1 CT .t e! G.I CNK OETAL6 CI I I I I Lal I lbT E 'm P 1 •e ue. G.E I GTAL6 1 1 1 l 1 A G.6 Vn MAU ulu ll.l LANa6CAPE PLAN f 1 I II l 1 It 11 FF u, UN PE 0E7AIL6 CI �Y l 1 i 1 I 1 1{F II ERa010,YNCENTERCITY IIALS Ij •VI BIN CREEKP ARKWAY 1 1 PH:m YM CEME0. MNPE6'OTA f6at. r li m BLOCK A. DEVELOPER II NORSE BIIILCWa BVBTE46 I' BLOCK I 110 GRNETTRWn 1� IOTI MYEMITN.WISmN MI: TlE6dEA.ro.IL ENGINEER i (Y 1 ,l L I!--- -i1z I L°'. y OPEOCRT D. Mda9 LEGEND 6VRYEA: PIM)TERM GngN A66apATE6, WC 1 "mHL SO N w.. I 1 Y I i ur I l II l� JaML ��YeA PH:RLT]..na Fx: utTm.6W a, i 11 1 111 EXISTING PROPOSED S SURVEYOR I e LOT Y "vEa CO. ?661T AYE. N. 6ROORLYN PARK MN 661E I' I 1 •mwl+.mn .ulw.1.N PH: M.6.660.00W FA: 16]b66.ME! .MH1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION IGE, nLOC111 AN0 THE EA6TERLY Y.00FEETOF wTI.6LOC1(1 ..n.- .000rts wvrurv.e1w11 AQgINWn GOLOTE ALL WTANAMI AOaRION, PER PUTOF 1 1 I -e.xe- CW1f..101e1 WME u1f fBDIY Wai.1 RECOMWHFNNEPWCOIlN1Y, MINNEFATA 11 I 1 �'b ,.�m�Ye.Nlw. /'y �.rnOrwm.mnaun II 1 i i i 4 Wcmar ^e •rrno®vmRlo.w /F���WFH11 11 A V I �re�?est� EGS►e►r+6nf N'4 I I 1 1 1 y T 0310I SPF/6DS AAK NOTE Con.trottlon Drawing Far Id—don Only Not A R600rd Of Ad" ConWwdom I 0929.03 Established in 1962 INVOICE NO. 67794 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC F.B.NO. 955 -06 LAND SURVEYORS SCALE: 1" 60' REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA O Denotes Iron Monument o 7801 73rd Avenue North 783 -580 -3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Fax No. 580 -3522 E 3ururBvrs C2rrtifirtttr N KPM PROPERTIES c 0 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL: Lot 2, Block 1 and the Easterly 88.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1 adjoining said Lot 2 all in TANAMI ADDIT /O/V, per plot of record in Hennepin County, Minnesota. t 69TH AVENUE N. S89 "W 260.80 0 4 base mog of riser i iser ,M r i I 5 -5 i YYI I rl PORTION OF EASEMENT t Z TO BE VACATED N r I W r Z 2 Y co Y' m 1 i g YG r1UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT Yln_____ r S85e05'07 "W 260.00 DESCRIPTION OF EASEMENT TO BE VACATED: To vacate that part of the utility and drainage easement as donated and dedicated on the record plat of TANAMI ADDITION, Hennepin county, Minnesota, described as follow: The Westerly 5 feet of Lot 2, Block 1 and the Easterly 5 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, adjoining said Lot 2 all in said TANAMI ADDITION; except the Northerly 10 feet and Southerly 5 feet thereof. The only easements shown ore from plats of record or information provided by client. We hereby certify that this is o true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of aA buildings and visible encroachments, if ony, from or on Signed said land. Charles F. Anderson, Minn. Reg. No.21753 or Surveyed by us this 14th day of January E0 04 Gregory R. Preach, Minn Reg No. 24992 City Council Agenda Item No. 9a PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 4-10,2004, TO BE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WEEK WHEREAS, community development services provided in our community by the Community Development Department are an integral part of our citizens' everyday lives; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department defines future City directions through such functions and services as land use and comprehensive planning, development plan review, redevelopment, economic development, zoning and subdivision compliance, preservation of existing housing supply, and protective inspections; and WHEREAS, among the City's most fundamental ordinances are those which provide standards for the safe construction of buildings in which people live, work, and play; and WHEREAS, through the efforts of code officials and their cooperative relationship with the construction industry, the administration of these health and life safety standards is assured; and WHEREAS, the technical knowledge, skills, and abilities of the community development staff promotes the health, safety, and comfort of this community which greatly depends on these protective inspections and services; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that the services provided by the community development staff be recognized and appreciated. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of April 4 through 10, 2004, to be Community Development Week in the City of Brooklyn Center and encourage all citizens to recognize the contributions that community development staff make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life and to create awareness as to the importance of construction and building codes and to spotlight the role of the dedicated code official in administering those codes. March 22. 200A Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk City Council Agenda Item No. 9b PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 18 THROUGH APRIL 25, 20043, AS DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE WHEREAS, the Holocaust was the state -s P systematic sponsored, P ersecution and annihilation of European Jewry by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945. Jews were the primary victims six million were murdered; Gypsies, the handicapped, and Poles were also targeted for destruction or decimation for racial, ethnic, or national reasons. Millions more, including homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, Soviet prisoners of war, and political dissidents, also suffered grievous oppression and death under Nazi tyranny; and WHEREAS, the history of the Holocaust offers an opportunity to reflect on the moral responsibilities of individuals, societies, and governments; and WHEREAS, we the people of the City of Brooklyn Center should always remember the terrible events of the Holocaust and remain vigilant against hatred, persecution, and tyranny; and WHEREAS, we the people of the City of Brooklyn Center should actively rededicate ourselves to the principles of individual freedom in a just society; and WHEREAS, the Days of Remembrance have been set aside for the people of the City of Brooklyn Center to remember the victims of the Holocaust as well as to reflect on the need for respect of all peoples; and WHEREAS, pursuant to an Act of Congress (Public Law 96 -388, October 7, 1980) the United States Holocaust Memorial Council designates the Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust to be Sunday, April 18, through Sunday, April 25, 2004, including the international Day of Remembrance known as Yom Hashoah, April 18. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the Brooklyn Center City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of Sunday, April 18, through Sunday, April 25, 2004, as Days of Remembrance in memory of the victims of the Holocaust, and in honor of the survivors, as well as the rescuers and liberators, and further proclaim that we, as citizens of the City of Brooklyn Center, should strive to overcome intolerance and indifference through learning and remembrance. March 22. 2004 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Dear Mayor: In accordance with its Congressional mandate, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum will once again lead the nation in the annual Days of Remembrance of the Victims of the Holocaust, commemorated this year from Sunday, April 18 through Sunday, April 25. The Day of Remembrance, Yom Hashoah, is April 18. This year's observance will honor the memory of the Jews of Hungary, deported sixty years ago in the final stages of World War II, as well as those few courageous individuals, organizations and countries, such as Raoul Wallenberg and the War Refugee Board, who attempted to rescue them. The anniversary of the deportations provides the theme for this year's memorial ceremony, captured in remarks by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on March 24, 1944: "For Justice and Humanity. During this speech, President Roosevelt called for the rescue of the Jewish population in Hungary, saying, "In the name of justice and humanity let all freedom loving people rally to this righteous undertaking." Today, as the Museum begins its second decade as America's memorial to the victims of the Holocaust, individual and communal acts of heroism and rescue during the Holocaust serve as powerful examples of how our nation and its citizens can and must respond to acts of hatred and inhumanity. Recognizing the importance that we, as a nation and individually, must strive to overcome prejudice and inhumanity through education, vigilance and tolerance, your personal leadership in this national commitment to remember is essential. Thus, we respectfully encourage you commemorate the Days of Remembrance with appropriate ceremonies and programs and to issue, as was done in the past, a special Days of Remembrance Proclamation for distribution to the citizens of your city. A sample is enclosed for your consideration and convenience. A background piece on the theme is enclosed and we encourage you to access the Museum's website at www.ushmm.ore for further information on Days of Remembrance. We are grateful for your leadership and support in this important endeavor. Sincerely, Benjamin Meed Chairman, Days of Remembrance Enclosures 100 RAOUL WALLENBERG PLACE, SW, WASHINGTON, DC 20024 -2126 TEL 202.488.0400 FAX 202.488.2690 www.ushmm.org "For Justice and Humanity" Days of Remembrance April 18-25,2004 "In the name of justice and humanity let all freedom loving people rally to this righteous undertaking. President Franklin D. Roosevelt calls for the rescue of the Jewish population in Hungary, March 24, 1944 The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum is mandated by Congress to educate Americans about the history of the Holocaust and to annually commemorate its victims in the national Days of Remembrance ceremony. The Museum has designated "For Justice and Humanity" as the theme for the 2004 Days of Remembrance in memory of the Jews of Hungary, deported sixty years ago in the final stages of World War II; and to honor those courageous individuals as well as the few organizations and countries who attempted to rescue them. In 1944, Nazi Germany and its collaborators continued, even accelerated, the killings of the "Final Solution" despite certain military defeat. By late summer 1944, Soviet forces, having crushed the German Army in Belorussia, were approaching Germany from the east, while British and American forces, following their successful D -Day invasion of France in June, approached from the west. Suspicious of Hungarian efforts to desert the Axis alliance, German forces occupied Hungary in March 1944. In May, Hungarian officials, with German guidance, began the systematic deportation of Jews from Hungary. Most of the victims were deported to the Auschwitz Birkenau killing center in German- occupied Poland, while a minority was deported to a string of transit and forced labor camps on the Austro Hungarian border. In less than three months, German and Hungarian authorities deported approximately 440,000 Jews. At least half of them were killed in gas chambers immediately upon their arrival at Auschwitz Birkenau. By the time the Red Army drove the Germans and their Hungarian collaborators out of Hungary in April 1945, nearly four -fifths of the Hungarian Jewish community had been killed. Yet there were some individuals, organizations and countries that asserted the value of human life in the ace of the systematic murder of men, women and children. The War Refugee Board (WRB), established on January 22, 1944, by executive order of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, worked with Jewish organizations, diplomats from neutral countries, and resistance groups in Europe to rescue Jews from occupied territories and provide relief to inmates of Nazi concentration camps. Its mandate was to take "all measures to rescue victims of enemy oppression in imminent danger of death." The creation of the WRB was largely the work of Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. and his team. Following the 1942 confirmation of the mass murder of Europe's Jews, the failure of the Bermuda Conference on rescue in April 1943, and the growing outrage of the American Jewry at how little was being done to rescue the remnant of Europe's Jews, there was pressure on Roosevelt to take action, which he fmally did in establishing the WRB in 1944. Measured against the enormity of the Holocaust, the work of the WRB and its accomplishments were far too late and exceedingly modest. Yet, when viewed in the context of the military situation in early 1944, and the enormous challenges faced by the agency, the activities and results of the WRB were significant. Raoul Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat based in Budapest, Hungary, led the War Refugee Board's most extensive rescue efforts. Wallenberg and his Swedish colleagues helped protect tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews from being deported to Auschwitz by distributing protective Swedish passports or travel papers. As Sweden was a neutral country, Germany could not easily harm Swedish citizens. Diplomats from other neutral countries joined the rescue effort. Carl Lutz, a Swiss diplomat, issued certificates of emigration placing nearly 50,000 Jews in Budapest under Swiss protection. Italian businessman Giorgio Perlasca, posing as a Spanish diplomat, issued forged Spanish visas and established under his "authority" safe houses, including one for Jewish children. When Soviet forces liberated Budapest in February 1945, more than 100,000 Jews still remained in the city because of the efforts of Wallenberg, Lutz, Perlasca, and other diplomats and individuals. The War Refugee Board played a crucial role in the rescue of as many as 200,000 Jews in German- occupied Europe. U.S. officials knew about German plans to murder the European Jews more than a year before taking Opecific action, in establishing the War Refugee Board, to help rescue Europe's Jews. Even though this action was late, it saved lives, reminding us of the terrible consequences of indifference and of the possibility for individuals, organizations and countries to confront and work to halt acts of genocide or related crimes against humanity. City Council Agenda Item No. 9c PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 17 -24,2004, TO BE THE GREAT SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED CLEANUP WEEK WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is dedicated to preserving and protecting the water resources in our watersheds; and WHEREAS, litter and trash can be washed into our lakes, rivers, wetlands, and streams, polluting the water and blocking our storm sewers and storm drains; and WHEREAS, citizens can take an active role in protecting our water resources by picking up litter and trash and keeping our streets, parks, neighborhoods, and community clean; and WHEREAS, the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions' annual Cleanup Event "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup" will take place April 17 24, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota, with the consent and support of the City Council, do hereby proclaim: 1. Aril 17 24, 2004, to be The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week. April g p 2. The City Council hereby reaffirms its commitment to protecting and preserving our water resources and encourages residents, businesses, and institutions to use The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week 2004 to help prevent water pollution and preserve our watersheds by participating in a Cleanup Event or by using this time to pick up trash and clean up our homes, businesses, streets, neighborhoods, and community. March 22, 2004 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSIONS 3235 Fernbrook Lane Plymouth, MN 55447 Telephone (763) 553 -1144 Fax (763) 553 -9326 March 5, 2004 Honorable Mayors City Managers City Clerks Gentlemen and Ladies: The Shingle Creek/West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions, of which your city is a member, will be sponsoring an annual watershed cleanup event in April called "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup." Last year hundreds of residents in the two watersheds participated by cleaning up Shingle Creek and its tributaries, parks, lakeshore, wetlands, and other areas. To help promote this event, the Education and Public Outreach Committee (EPOC) of the Commissions asks that you consider the attached proclamation declaring April 17 -24 -2004 to be "The Great Shingle Creek Watershed Cleanup Week." Several cities have organized formal cleanup events to complement their Adopt -A- Park programs or Earth Day activities. The EPOC has prepared fliers that will be distributed to elementary school children to publicize these events, and is coordinating coverage with local papers and cable TV. City cleanup coordinators are: Brooklyn Center Joyce Gulseth 763 -569 -3327 Brooklyn Park Jay Lotthammer 763 -493 -8345 Crystal Rebecca Brown 763 -531 -1143 Plymouth Margie Vigoren 763 -509 -5507 Robbinsdale Russ Fawbush 763 -537 -4534 Aside from being a worthy event on its own, this event is an NPDES Phase II Public Outreach activity. Not all cities in the watershed have organized an event in their city, but we hope you will consider the proclamation and encourage your residents to participate in an adjoining city, or to clean up their neighborhood or a favorite park or nature area on their own. For more information contact your city watershed commissioner, cleanup coordinator, Diane Spector at Wenck Associates, 763.479.4280, or this office. If your Council does enact such a proclamation, please send a copy to me at the above address. Thank you! Sincerely, Judie A. Anderson Education and Public Outreach Committee Cc: Commissioners J: \CLIENTS\S \SHINGLEC\ CLEANUP\ L- conveyingproclamation2004.doc SHINGLE CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION BROOKLYN CENTER BROOKLYN PARK CRYSTAL MAPLE GROVE MINNEAPOLIS NEW HOPE OSSEO PLYMOUTH ROBBINSDALE WEST MISSISSIPPI WATERSHED MANAGEMENT COMMISSION BROOKLYN CENTER BROOKLYN PARK CHAMPLIN MAPLE GROVE OSSEO City Council Agenda Item No. 9d Office of the City Clerk City of .Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Maria er FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk DATE: March 17, 2004 SUBJECT: Mayoral Appointment to Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission The Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council is a human services planning and coordinating agency serving the cities of'Brookiyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Corcoran, Crystal, Dayton, Golden Valley, Hanover, Hassan, New Hope, Maple Grove, Osseo, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, and Rogers since 1972. The goals of the Council are to improve access to human services for area residents, raise awareness of human service needs, and coordinate and assist in planning for needed human services in the community. The Advisory Commission is composed of citizen representatives appointed for two -year terms by their respective City Council. Brooklyn Center appoints two members. As an Advisory Commissioner, representatives are asked to attend one Advisory Commission meeting per month and serve on one Commission committee or task force during the year. One vacancy exists on the Advisory Commission with a term expiration of December 31, 2005. Notice of vacancy on the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun Poston February 12, 2004. Notice was posted at City Hall and Community Center and on the City's web site and aired on Cable Channel 16 from February 2 through March 10, 2004. A letter was sent to those persons who previously had submitted an application for appointment to a Brooklyn Center advisory commission informing them of the vacancy and requesting that they call the City Clerk if they are interested in applying for the commission. They were given the choice of either reapplying or having their application previously submitted considered. Notices were also sent to current advisory commission members. Attached for City Council Members only are copies of the applications received: Tracy Groves 5337 Girard Avenue North Audrey Harris Blount 3429 53rd Avenue North, #106 A letter was sent to each applicant notifying them that their applications for appointment would be considered at the March 22, 2004, City Council meeting. Other attachments include: 1) Procedures for filling commission vacancies adopted by the City Council on March 27, 1995. 2) Memorandum from Mayor Kragness indicating her nomination. Recommended Council Action: Motion by Council to ratify the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission nomination by Mayor Kragness with term expiring December 31, 2005. 6301 Shingle Creek g e Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone &TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org City of Brooklyn Center Procedures for Filling Commission /Task Force Vacancies Adopted by Council 3/27/95 The following process for filling commission/task force vacancies was approved by the City Council at its March 27, 1995, meeting: Vacancies in the Commission shall be filled by Mayoral appointment with majority consent of the City Council. The procedure for filling Commission vacancies is as follows: 1. Notices of vacancies shall be posted for 30 days before any official City Council action is taken; 2. Vacancies shall be announced in the City's official newspaper; 3. Notices of vacancies shall be sent to all members of standing advisory commissions; 4. Applications for Commission membership must be obtained in the City Clerk's office and must be submitted in writing to the City Clerk; 5. The City lerk shall forward copies of the applications to the Mayor and City Y p PP Y h' Council; 6. The Mayor shall identify and include the nominee's application form in the City Council agenda materials for the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented; 7. The City Council, by majority vote, may approve an appointment at the City Council meeting at which the nominee is presented. COUNCIL PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED FOR FILLING COMMISSION VACANCIES Or City of Brooklyn Center Office of the Mayor A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM TO: Councilmember Kathleen Carmody Councilmember Kay Lasman Councilmember Diane Niesen Councilmember Robert Peppe FROM: Myrna Kragness, Mayo DATE: March 17, 2004 SUBJECT: Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission Appointment As outlined in our policy for filling commission vacancies, I would request ratification from Council Members for the nomination of Audrey Harris- Blount, 3429 53rd Avenue North, #106, to the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council Advisory Commission with term expiring December 31, 2005. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org City Council Agenda Item No. 9e Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE A BOULEVARD TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN FOR THE 2004 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TO INCLUDE CONIFEROUS TREES WHEREAS, the City by resolution adopts a schedule of appropriate trees for replacement in connection with the removal of boulevard trees during City street reconstruction projects; and WHEREAS, the list of approved replacement trees has not included coniferous trees; and WHEREAS, there are coniferous trees that would likely be appropriate for inclusion in the list of acceptable tree species during the City's replacement of removed trees following a street reconstruction project; and WHEREAS, a number of coniferous trees will be removed in connection with the 2004 street reconstruction project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED b the City Council of the City of Y tY tY Brooklyn Center that the City staff be and hereby are directed to prepare for City Council consideration a proposed list of acceptable species of replacement trees for the 2004 neighborhood reconstruction project for the replacement activities that will occur in 2005 and that such proposed list of approved trees for the 2004 project include those coniferous species deemed appropriate for this reforestation effort with such proposed list to be submitted to the Council by the first regular meeting in June, 2004. March 22, 2004 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution. was declared duly passed and adopted. City Council Agenda Item No. 9f Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SELECTING THE NO WAIVER OPTION FOR CITY STATUTORY TORT LIABILITY WHEREAS, the City has an option to waive its protection under the tort liability limitation as contained in Minnesota Statute; and WHEREAS, the statutory tort limit is $300,000 per individual and an aggregate of $1,000,000 per incident; and WHEREAS, the City is required to make that declaration each year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the City opts not to waive its right to limit liability under the Statute. March 22, 2004 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Y emorandum Date: 15 March 2004 To: Michael McCauley City Manager From: Daniel Jordet Director of Fiscal Support Service Re: Statutory Tort Liability Limits Each year the City Council must decide whether to waive the statutory limitations on tort Liability. In the past the City has decided not to waive the limitations and purchase additional insurance coverage to protect itself against higher potential tort liability claims. This has saved the City in excess of 7,000 each of the last two years. Staff requests consideration of the attached resolution by the City Council at its next regular meeting. LMCIT LIABILITY COVERAGE WAIVER FORM Cities obtaining liability coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust must decide whether or not to waive the statutory tort liability limits to the extent of the coverage purchased. The decision to waive or not to waive the statutory limits has the following effects: If the city does not waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to recover no more than $300,OOO.on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to $1,000,000. These statutory tort limits would apply regardless of whether or not the city purchases the optional excess liability coverage. If the city waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover up to $1,000,000. on a single occurrence. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to $1,000,000., regardless of the number of claimants. Ifthe city waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the number of claimants. Claims to which the statutory municipal tort limits do not apply are not affected by this decision. This decision must be made by the city council. Cities purchasing coverage must complete and g g p return this form to LMCIT before the effective date of the coverage. For further information, contact LMCIT. You may also wish to discuss these issues with your city attorney. The City of accepts liability coverage limits of from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT). Check one: The city DOES NOT WAIVE the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04. The city WAIVES the monetary limits on tort liability established by Minnesota Statutes 466.04, to the extent of the limits of the liability coverage obtained from LMCIT. Date of city council meeting Signature Position Return this completed form to LMCIT, 145 University Ave. W., St. Paul, MN. 55103 -2044 Page 1 of 1 City Council Agenda Item No. 9g City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Kragness, Co Vill, nay, Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe .FROM: Michael J. McCaule DATE: March 16, 2004 SUBJECT: Diving Board Attached please find a memorandum from Jim Glasoe regarding the need to remove the high diving board from the pool. As indicated in the memorandum, regulations governing diving boards have changed since its installation. While it appears the regulations changed in 1995, subsequent inspections by Hennepin County Community Health did not bring this to light. We did have the pool inspected prior to beginning the remodeling plans to ensure what was undertaken with respect to the p P g g gP p wading pool and other improvements would meet applicable regulations. There were no changes made to the diving boards or the main pool as part of the remodeling. This situation was not discovered during those inspections either. It does not appear that we would have any success in seeking a variance and I would recommend that we proceed to remove the diving board all together. 0 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Communit y Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org 61 City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM DATE: March 8, 2004 TO: Michael J. McCauley, City Manager FROM: Jim Glasoe, Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services SUBJECT: Three -Meter Diving Board In July 2003, representatives from the Hennepin County Community Health Department conducted an inspection of the Community Center pool, specifically, the diving boards. On March 4, 2004, we received a letter (copy Attached) from Hennepin County Community Health Services, informing us that the three -meter diving board at the Community Center did not meet current safety standards. The letter further stated that the diving board was a "serious health hazard" and should be removed as soon as possible. At that time, I closed three -meter diving board until further notice. At issue, is the depth of the pool and the distance between the individual divin g boards. The current Minnesota Department of Public Health Swimming Pool Rules, and Hennepin County Ordinance 4 requires that a pool with a three -meter diving board have a minimum depth of twelve feet, and be separated from adjacent boards by no less than 10 feet. Currently, our pool is 11 feet deep and has 8 feet of separation between the boards. In speaking with the County Heath Department, I discovered that the diving boards were in compliance when the facility was opened in 1971. However, The State Health Department adopted revised depths and clearances related to diving boards in January 1995. Although the County Health Department regularly inspects the pool for water quality, cleanliness and safety, no inspection related to the diving boards had been done since the rule change in 1995. As part of our conversation, Hennepin County staff did say that we would be eligible to apply for a variance from the Minnesota Department of Health Swimming Pools Division. To that end, I spoke with Steve Klemm with the Minnesota Department of Health. He indicated that we were entitled to file a variance, but that there was a $500 fee to file the request. He noted this fee was instituted last spring as a result of budget reductions, and was intended to cover staff time associated with examining and considering each variance request. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org In discussing the specifics of our situation with Steve, he was not optimistic about our chances of being granted a variance. He felt the discrepancy between our pool depth and the stated minimums was too great. In addition, he felt similarly about the proximity of the boards. He stated that he was aware of only one variance being granted, and that was for a competitive pool with the depth being within an inch or two of the requirements. He continued that no variances had been granted in recreational pool settings. Similarly, our options for remedying the individual problems are slim to none. Adding depth to the pool would be a major undertaking, and cost in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars. Obviously this would be cost prohibitive. In addition, there is not sufficient room between the last diving board and the sidewall of the pool to allow for different placement of the diving boards As a result of the above information, I see no viable option but to recommend we dismantle and remove the three -meter diving board. As always, please let me know if you have any questions, or would like additional information Hennepin County Community Health Department Epidemiology and Environmental Health Epidemiology: (952) 351 -5230 1011 South First Street, Suite 215 Environmental Health: (952) 351 -5200 Hopkins, MN 55343 -9413 FAX: (952) 351 -5222 February 25, 2004 Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN Dear Jim Glasoe: In July 2003, Hennepin County Health Department representatives conducted an inspection of the pool at the community center, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway. The inspection revealed that the diving well is not in compliance with the Minnesota Department of Health Public Swimming Pool Rules and Hennepin County Ordinance Number 4. Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4717.3750, subpart D. requires that a pool with a 3 meter diving board must have a diving well with a minimum depth of 12 feet and ten feet of horizontal separation between diving boards (measured from center -to- center). The community center pool is only 11 feet deep at its deepest point and only has 8 feet of separation between boards. Not providing adequate separation and depth of water for a divin g board well is a serious health hazard. To be in compliance with this State requirement, the 3 -meter diving board must be removed as soon as possible. Please schedule an inspection with me so I may inspect this pool and verify the corrective measures have been completed. If you have any questions, please contact me at (952) 351 -5212. Sincere 4, Duane Hudson Hennepin County Environmentalist CC: Susan Palchick, Supervisor, Hennepin County Roberta Jones, Hennepin County Attorney Enclosure: Hennepin County Pool Inspection Report MN Rules, Chapter 4717.3750 D. An Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper over 300 over 300 pool depths compatibLo with the level of competition anticipated. m later L 200 1 /100 j C. Diving is not permitted, except In areas which los ets 1 /100 1/50 irinals L /100 1/200 conform to the ninimum dlnensions specified In this part. Lavatories L /100 1 /100 1/200 1/200 D. The dinenslons of the diving area in all pools N Showers 1/50 1/50 L /50 1/50 i must conform to the minimum dimensions speolE In this part. Subp. 3, Additional fixtures. Additional sanitation E I Lengths lxtures must he provided for pool facllltles with extensive I Length of eck areas or facilities that provlde,other functions In Haight of Minimum Diving I7 ccordance with the sanitation fixture requirements In the state g Diving Board Water Depths Overhang Well hun -out 1N gliding code, Oubp. 4. shower temperature. Showers must be eupplled ith water at a temperature of at least 90 degrees F•ahrenhelt at H D D1 Ol LL L2 rate of at least 2,0 gallons per minute, Thertv,ostatic, .empering, or mixing valves must boar d 6 Et. 0.5 Et. 7 Et. 12 ft. 10,5 Et. be Installed lE neceeenry to Deck L prevent water temperatAtres in excess of 130 degrees, or no boar Subp. 5. Layout. pool users leaving the dressing room 1 m 6 Et. 10 ft. 5 ft. 12 ft. 15 ft. lust pass the showers last In route to,the pool. 3 m 6 ft. 12 ft. 5 Et. 13 ft. 21 ft. Subp. 6. Floor finish; The floor finish between the :oilet and shower areas and the pool must be nonslip and I Clearances ionabeorbent. Subp. 7, Wading pool exception. On -site showers are not Adjacent Center of @�lulr for freestanding wading a free chlorine Height of Boacd's Board to W .esldual of at least two parts per mILLion is maintained In the I Diving Boacd Water. Depths Center -to- Center sidewall c a ?ool and tho owner of the pool requeste.that on Bite showers not i is required. -C Subp. 0. Lighting. Lighting for toilet, shower, and i if Do D1 locker facilities moat provide at least.,ten E_ootcandles illumination measured at floor level. Deck Level C t3A: M9 s 144.05; L44.12s 144.1277 145n °.021 157.01 or no board 6 Et. 8.5 ft. 10 Et. to ft. W HISTr 19 SR 14191 19 OR 1637 1 m b ft, 10 ft. LO Et. 10 ft. o I 3 m 6 Et. 12 Et. l0 ft. 12 ft. 4717.3675 uR1tIKiHl C FOUNCAINS. C Drinking fountains must be provided' In the pool area for t a pools over 1,600 square feet, j VIUAtAIEf SA: 149 s 144.05; 144.121 144,123; 145A.02; 157.OL 1118T: 19 SR 1419; 19 OR 1637 WATER LEVEL 4717.3700 (Repealed, 19 OR 1419; 19 OR L6371 1 I rt. 3 ft. to 3.ft. 6 Ir j s 4117.3750 STANDARDS FOR POOLS WITH DIVING, O, 0) urtenances In a diving •r he dimensions of the pool and app L area must neet the standards In tills part. I II A. There must be a completely unobstrudted clear distance of 16 feet above the diving board measured from the Ohl t, L, center of the front and of the board. This area must extend at I ED t M least eight feet behind, eight feet to eaoh side, and 16 feet (i II ahead of the measuring point. m D. Pools used for competitive diving must provide 1 SAr 6IS s 144.05; 144.12; 144.1231 145A.02; 157.01 W i! GIST: 19 OR 14191 19 OR 1637 CE 33 34 MAR -04 -2004 15:19 Henn Co Env Hlth Epi 952 351 5222 P.03/04 s. x N r o d d N r n o� 0 7 m V m m D_ np J Q N illli O N -4 82 In M S, .vrs tF t .I 1 ..............i _.._•._.._Y;� w i S 3 w D C w S u C C a� so CD S o m Overhead clearance: Measured front center front edge of board. Minimum is 8 feet backward, IG feet forward and 8 feet to each side area must have 16 feet ceiling height with no obstniclion. Q City g Council Agenda Item No. 9h CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby iven that a public hearing will be held on the 26th day of April 2004 at 7:00 g P g Y P p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance relating to water use restrictions. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please notify the Deputy City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 4 -202 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER REGARDING A SPRINKLING BAN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 4 -202 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended to read: Section 4 -202. CONDITIONS OF USE. Subdivision 1. Authority to Restrict Use. The City of Brooklyn Center hereby reserves the right to limit the use of water from the City water supply and distribution system and to prescribe emergency conditions for use of water. The City Council may in its discretion adopt a resolution suno_ lementine the snrinklinQ ban under Subdivision 2 with a total prohibition on sprinkliniz. Subdivision 2. Sprinkline Ban. To protect the health and safety of the consumers and the general welfare of the City, and to encourage water conservation. the City hereby adopts the followine permanent svrinklinv ban. The surinkline or waterinE of lawns and siardens is prohibited from May 1 to September 30 each year: provided, however. that odd- numbered vrovertv addresses may water on odd numbered days. and even- numbered Propertv addresses may water on even numbered days. Subdivision 3. Exceptions. The sorinklina ban under subdivision 2 does not Mply to: a. Propertv owners usinsz a private well for svrinkliniz: b. Propertv owners who obtain a watering permit from the City for the watering of new sod for the first twelve weeks after it is sodded or the watering of new seed for the first twelve weeks after it is seeded: and C. Propertv owners who have received approval from the City to overate a drip irrigation system. ORDINANCE NO. Subdivision 4. Discontinuance of service. a. The public utilities division may discontinue service to any customer of the water system without notice when necessary for repairs. b. Upon reasonable notice, service may be discontinued for nonpayment of individual accounts, [(;11•] for disregard of duly established rules and regulations pertaining to the operations of the water distribution system or for violation of the sprinkline ban provisions in subdivision 2. C. Whenever service is discontinued for nonpayment of accounts, lor] disregarding duly established rules and regulations, or for violation of the sprinkline ban. such service shall not be resumed except upon payment of outstanding bills, enforcement fines, full compliance with duly established rules and regulations or sprinkliniz ban. and the payment to the public utilities division of a service restoration charge as prescribed by the adopted rate schedule. d. The City of Brooklyn Center or the public utilities division shall not be liable for any damage to persons or property caused in whole or in part by the discontinuance of water service. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2004. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) AGENDA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION March 22, 2004 Immediately Following Regular City Council Meeting at 7:00 P.M City Council Chambers 1. Council Member Lasman: Prayer Breakfast Committee response regarding invocation 2. Council Member Carmody: Earle Brown Days Parade charging for political participants 3. Council Member Niesen: discussion of having Springsted make a presentation to the City Council on Tax Increment Financing basics 4. Locomotive Horn draft work plan for developing regulations 5. Dangerous and Potentially Dangerous Dog Ordinance discussion 6. City Council Handbook a. Council Member Niesen i. E -mail policy b. Revised informational pages i. Updating of pages c. Revised format: i. City Council rules policies ii. Informational materials 7. Taxi Ordinance discussion 8. Rental License fees (Defer to April 26 9. Review of social services 10. Miscellaneous 11. Adjourn City of y e o Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe From.: Michael J. McCauley City Manager Date: March 17, 2004 Re: Springsted Presentation Council Member Niesen has suggested that a presentation by Springsted on the basics of tax increment financing would be beneficial. The item is on the agenda to determine if there is interest by the Council to have such a presentation as part of an upcoming work session. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cit y o .Y me o rookl nce r. r g City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Kragness, Co members Carm Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe FROM: Michael J. McCauley DATE: March 16, 2004 SUBJECT` Quiet Zone for Azelia A nue Railroad Crossing Following the recent City Council Work Session, Mr. Blomstrom pursued options for working on a request to the Federal Government for a quiet zone to preclude the use of railroad horns at the Azelia crossing. Among the items considered were using City staff by potentially augmenting summer staffing, using consulting personnel, and combination of those approaches. The concern that was expressed at the Work Session was the need for engineering staff to focus on the current engineering projects, development ofthe next iteration ofthe Capital Improvement Plan, bring as- builts up to date, dealing with reduced staffing levels, and preparing to under take the additional project in 2005 of conducting a feasibility study to connect Lilac Drive pursuant to Mr. Lang's request and the City Council's direction. The work plan proposal for the City Council would have Mr. Boganey assume the coordinating function for interfacing the results of the fieldwork with Mr. LeFevere and other coordinating efforts. Mr. Blomstrom would coordinate the technical work with SEH Consulting. Attached is a proposal received from SEH wherein an on -staff expert in this matter would undertake to do the field work and preparation of technical documentation for us. The largest impact that existed for staff time was the need to invent the wheel of how to approach these matters, the regulations, and identifying the appropriate contacts in the Federal Government and in the Canadian Pacific Railroad. Since SEH has done this on a repetitive basis, they can undertake this in significantly fewer hours then it would take City staff to bring themselves up to the same level of familiarity with both the appropriate contact persons and the applicable regulations. The proposal from SEH has an estimated budget of $2,000. We would estimate that a contingency should be included in that amount depending on the exact extent of public meetings or follow through necessary and there would also be charges from the City Attorney's office to draft the appropriate documents. I would recommend that the City Council approve a proposed work plan at a subsequent City Council meeting that would authorize engaging SEH to conduct the technical work that would be coordinated by W. Blomstrom and then in turn coordinated by Mr. Boganey with respect to the publication requirements and interfacing with legal drafting, etc. to minimize the impact on W. Blomstrom's time while we are trying to get this year's construction projects underway. The current City Council budget in professional services provides sufficient funds two facilitated Council Retreats. The current year's plan is for only one Retreat. Thus, if the Council accepted this recommendation, I would recommend that the funding be taken from the City Council's budget under the professional services category. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone& TDD Number Brooklyn Center, DIN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org SEH March 10, 2004 RE: City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Railroad Quiet Zone SEH No. P- BROCT0405.00 Mr. Todd Blomstrom Director of Public Works City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Dear Mr. Blomstrom: The City of Brooklyn Center has the desire to implement a railroad Quiet Zone for the Azelia Avenue grade crossing using the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) Interim Final Rules on Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway -Rail Grade Crossings. SEH is pleased to provide this proposal to help the City obtain a Quiet Zone designation for this crossing by completing the application tasks and documentation required by FRA. Background The Canadian Pacific (CP) Railroad operates a mainline track through Brooklyn Center with 24 trains per day using the track. The Azelia Avenue grade crossing was established in 2002 as a replacement for the France Avenue crossing. France Avenue was closed to accommodate the reconstruction of the CP railroad bridge over Highway 100. The Federal Inventory Number assigned to this crossing is 696401X. In 1994, Congress passed a law requiring the use of locomotive horns at public grade crossings. In 2000, the FRA developed draft rules which would grant the local communities a process to eliminate locomotive horns. In December of 2003, the FRA issued Interim Final Rules that became effective December 18, 2004. These rules allow local communities to define "Quiet Zones" and with certain engineering and enforcement activities, allow for the suspension of the locomotive horns. Through studies and data analyses, the FRA has determined that railroad signals with gates in conjunction with center medians, four quadrant gates or one -way streets are sufficient to provide adequate supplemental safety at these grade crossings. The FRA rules require a series of steps for implementation of a quiet zone. They include a field inspection by a diagnostic team to determine what safety devices are at the crossings and what safety devices are needed at the crossing; determine the quiet zone length; update of DOT inventory data; establish a public agency responsible for the quiet zone; determine the Quiet Zone Risk Index; design and construct the necessary supplemental safety devices, and notify the FRA and Railroads when a quiet zone commences. Scope of Services SEH proposes the following scope: 1) Meet with City staff, Canadian Pacific (CP) Railroad, and Mn/DOT to determine the quiet zone limits and what will be needed to bring Azelia Avenue into compliance. 2) Field review of the Azelia Avenue crossing for purposes of updating the inventory information and the adequacy of the supplemental safety devices in place. 3) Send to Mn/DOT and CP updated inventory information. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110 -5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com 1 651.490.2000 1 800.325.2055 1 651.490.2150 fax Mr. Todd Blomstrom March 10, 2004' Page 2 4) Recommend improvements (if needed) to bring supplemental safety devices into compliance with the FRA rules and prepare cost estimates for the work. 5) Meet with City staff to discuss recommendations and possible changes to City ordinances. 6) Make presentation to City Council on recommendations. 7) Develop a draft application letter for the City to submit to FRA and CP Railroad for creation of Quiet Zone. 8) Write final report. Team Dave McKenzie will be the Project Manager for this work. Dave has almost 30 years experience working in the railroad industry, and has worked on several quiet zone projects in Minnesota. He has been working with the CP and FRA in other communities to bring their grade crossings into compliance. Schedule Work could begin within two weeks. of authorization and be completed in 60 days. Compensation We propose to be compensated on an hourly basis for the scope of work proposed. Compensation will be at the hourly cost of personnel plus reimbursable expenses, including reproductions and mileage. The total estimated cost for the work described above is $2,000. Thank you for the opportunity to propose on this work. If you find the terms of this proposal satisfactory, please sign both copies of this letter, authorizing us to proceed, and return one copy to SEH. If approved below, this letter will serve as the Supplemental Letter Agreement as set forth in the Agreement for Professional Services dated March 12, 2001. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 651.490.2042. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT 7NDRICKSON INC. XX Dave McKenzie PE an ason PE Project Manager ncipal c: John Parotti, SEH Accepted this day of 2004. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By: Title: City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe From: Michael J. McCauley City Manager i C Y g Date: March 18, 2004 Re: Dangerous dog ordinance Attached are copies of an e-mail from Charlie LeFevere and Chief Bechthold responding to the questions and comments submitted by Council Members Carmody and Niesen. Council Member Carmody's questions and Council Member Niesen's comments are reproduced below: Council Member Carmodv questions: 1. Make sure potentially dangerous dogs are the same as dangerous dogs except for the $50,000 insurance requirement. 2. Restrictions from the time the dog is declared potentially dangerous or dangerous by police until the official declaration with all appeals is exhausted are that the dog must be in an enclosed area or muzzled and leashed at all times. 3. Reporting from police must be accurate and be able to be traced along with former calls for the same dog. 4. Is a fine possible for not registering your potentially dangerous or dangerous dog C -1- 265)? Or is this part of the state statute already? 5. in 1 -265 #3 What would the warning sign look like? 6. In 1 -265 #6 Why does it have to be multiple provocations? 7. In 1 -270 There is a device called the gentle leader that covers the mouth of the dog while walking it, is this okay or not? 8. In 1 -270 #6, Is there a fine or something attached if the seller does not inform of dog status? 9. In -1 -275, d, if the dog is not enclosed but has changed personality due to being neutered, aging, etc., it is up to the owner to change that designation. All restrictions apply until that occurs, right? 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org Council Member Niesen's comments To: Mike From: Diane 3 -8 -04 Re: Proposed addition to City Code: Chapter 1 Animals At our regular council meeting February 23, amendments to our City code, Chapter 1, were discussed. As per the discussion the following points represent my questions and comments to the proposal first presented to council regarding Dangerous Dogs (DD) and Potentially Dangerous Dogs (PDD). Existing law: Section 1 -115. DANGEROUS ANIMALS "If an animal is diseased, vicious, dangerous... and such animal cannot be impounded... such animal may be immediately killed by or under the direction..." COMMENT: As 1 -101 does not define the term: "dangerous," or, "vicious and does not cite state statute, perhaps those terms should be deleted from 1 -115, if I 115 remains. The bottom line of this paragraph is notification as to when a dog could be destroyed. Proposed section 1 -280 also deals with this situation. The sentence: "...or if the animal has made more than one attack on.a person..." is redundant with proposed 1 -280. Proposed law: Section 1 -250. DEFINITIONS "d. been determined to be a Dangerous Dog by the City or any other governmental jurisdiction" COMMENT: I disagree with this addition to what is otherwise provided in state statute. Inserting this phrase goes beyond state law and while providing flexibility, gives no protection to the public via criteria/source of Determination (objective, legally accepted standards), and/or citation (who) of Determining Authority "the City Therefore, it might be hard to enforce, and, if necessary, defend. Charlie stated that his intention with this sentence was to Drevent someone with a previously designated DD or PDD in a different iurisdiction (J) from cominc into BC in anonvmity. State statute 347.51 provides: "No person may own a dangerous dog in this state unless the dog is registered as provided in this section." State statute 347.52 and our proposed Section 1 -270 (2) state that if a DD or PDD is removed from the J, it must be re0istered as a Potentially Dangerous or Dangerous Dog in its new jurisdiction." Statutory J's would operate under this and Home Rule Js would either operate this or their own dog laws. Unless another J specifically excluded the provision of notification as per 347.52 IF they had established dog laws, would it not apply? The risk of this happening seems low. If a dog (in another J) commits an act that qualifies it for a Designation, an Animal Control Authority (ACA) would need to have made a Designation in order for this to apply, which Charlie notes is historically an unreliable occurrance. The other possibilities are that the event would be recorded in police files, or it would have remained private to the parties involved. In any case, it seems that we are mixing definitions as to what constitutes a PDD or DD with Taws about notification. Therefore, I would strike Section 1 -250 (l.d) and Section 1 -250 (2.d). Alternately, I would propose going further to learn of a dog's past history of incidents, reported or not. Probosed law: Section 1 -255. DECLARATION OF DANGEROUS OR POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS AND Section 1 -250 REVIEW OF DECLARATION COMMENT: These provisions appear to have no basis in state law. Per state statute provisions on PDD and DD: 347.50 through 347.56, the noted source of our proposed amendments, there is NO provision for appeal upon an ACA's decision for a dog Designation. Therefore I will argue strenuously to remove these sections. At this time I will not lay out the flow chart of proposed responsibilities including a new city panel for the pre- Council appeal timelines and possible outcomes however, I have drawn them up. Again„ state law gives citizens no opportunity to appeal a dog Designation, if actions by a dog meet the stated criteria, all that is necessary is for an ACA to formally make the Designation and deliver it to the dog owner(s). Public safety is the reason we are considering this amendment. As Councilmember Carmody stated, in cases of dog attack (or, in the words of the State: killing, wounding or worrying) we need to act immediately to protect citizens. Proposed law: Section 1 -265. REGISTRATION COMMENT: Section (3) Warning Signs, states that a warning symbol is to be placed on any warning signs. Section (5) Tags, should also, as provided for in state law, also carry this same symbol (347.51 Subd. 7). Also, if we are going to add this we should check with MN's Commissioner of Public Safety to see whether a universal symbol, and a corresponding template, already exists (see MN Rule 7417). If so, there is no reason to charge citizens an expense for providing this template. If such a symbol does not exist, or BC must pay something to acquire, we should charge citizens accordingly. Pronosed law: Section 1 -280. DESTRUCTION OF DOG IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES The dog may not be destroyed until the dog owner has had the opportunity for a hearing as described in Section 1- 255." COMMENT: If section 1 -255 is deleted (above) and we want to provide for a hearing before destroying a dog, we would need to have a procedure. I note that state law provides for this in 347.56: "The animal control authority may not destroy the dog until the dog owner has had the opportunity for a hearing before an impartial decision maker." Having a procedure in this case does have a basis in law. Searching through MN statutes and rules -I found no direct example of appeal procedures. A goal in adopting any such procedure would be to give citizens a fair opportunity to argue against having their pet destroyed and yet not create unnecessary and resource heavy bureacracy for BC. My initial and surface input goes something like this and involves about a month of time: a dog is seized and impounded for violating attack provision of PDD or DD ordinance (days:0) owner receives immediate notice via phone call or police visit with written notification left on doorstep (mailed notice goes out the following day) that dog is ordered to be destroyed (by ACA) (days: 1) owner has 5 days to notify City that s/he will appeal ACA order of destruction (days 6 ACA sets hearing within 10 days and the case is heard by the ACA (days 16) ACA makes final determination (days 16) owner has 5 days from final determination to notify City of intent to appeal to Council (days 21) appeal to Council takes place at next regularly scheduled council meeting following receipt of notification of Intent to Appeal ACA Decision to Destroy. N Michael McCaule 0a -ngerous dogs From: "LeFevere, Charlie L.° <clefevere @Kennedy- Graven.com> To: "Mike Mccauley (&mail)" mmccauley @ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us> Date: 3/17/04 3:25PM Subject: Dangerous dogs Mike, The following are responses to the concerns raised by Councilmembers Carmody and Niesen. First, the questions of Councilmember Carmody: 1. The proposed ordinance treats potentially dangerous dogs the same as dangerous dogs except in the case of the required $50,000 bond or liability requirement uirement in Section 1 -265. q 2. The process for determining that a dog is dangerous or potentially dangerous begins with the service of notice on the owner of an intent to declare the dog dangerous or potentially dangerous. The owner has the right to a hearing before that determination is made. However, once a determination is made in accordance with the Ordinance that a do is dangerous or potentially dangerous, the owner is 9 9 P Y required wired b Section 1 255.4. to "immediately comply with all applicable requirements of this Ordinance Y Y P Y PP or q immediately cause the dog to be humanely destroyed or removed from the City limits." Although the owner of the dog has the right to appeal this decision to the City Council, and potentially to Court after that, the obligation of the owner to comply with the requirements of the Ordinance is not suspended by the appeal process. 3. Concerns relating to police reporting procedures should be addressed by the police department. 4. A violation of the Ordinance is a misdemeanor and subjects the owner to fines, penalties and jail time specified by State law. The Council cannot increase the maximum penalties for a misdemeanor above those provided by State law. However, if the Council wished to do so, it could specify lower maximum penalties for failing to register a dog. 5. The design of the dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog warning sign would be specified by the police department. Under State law, this symbol is required to be uniform and is specified by the State Commissioner of Public Safety after consultation with animal control professionals. The Commissioner of Public Safety is required to provide copies of the warning signal requested by counties regulating animals. Therefore, I assume that this warning symbol would be available to the police department from the State Commissioner of Public Safety. 6. Section 1- 265.6. lists circumstances under which a dog cannot be declared potentially dangerous or dangerous. The language relating to damage to persons who are shown to have repeatedly provoked, tormented, abused or assaulted the dog in the past is identical to the language used in Minn. Stat. Section 347.51, Subd. 5(2) the state law dealing with dangerous dogs. 7. The Ordinance requires that dangerous dogs and potentially dangerous dogs be muzzled. I do not believe that a gentle leader would qualify as a muzzle. The gentle leader is designed to prevent a dog from pulling rather than to act as a muzzle. The advertisements for the product state specifically that it is not a muzzle, 8. Section 1- 270.6. requires a person selling a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog to notify the purchaser of the status of the dog. The failure to do so would be a misdemeanor, subject to misdemeanor penalties established by State law. 9. A person may request a review of a dangerous dog or potentially dangerous dog declaration under Section 1 -260. Such review may result in a determination that the dog is no longer dangerous or potentially dangerous. However, until that determination is made and the designation of the dog as dangerous or potentially dangerous is rescinded, all requirements applicable to dangerous dogs or potentially dangerous dogs would continue to be in effect. The following are responses to the comments of Councilmember Niesen: 1. Section 1 -115. Section 1 -115 is a provision that currently exists in the City's code. It covers several situations that are not covered by new Section 1 -280. Section 1 -115 provides for the killing of an animal that cannot be impounded after reasonable effort or without serious risk to any person. This covers situations that are more in the nature of emergency situations that police officers may confront with a dangerous or diseased dog. Section 1 -115 also covers the situation where an animal has made more than one attack on a person. There may be cases when this part of Section 1 -115 overlaps with 1 -280. However, 1 -115 does not require that the attacks on a person inflict substantial or great bodily harm. If more that one such attack occurred, the City could act under section 1 -115, even if the attacks did not inflict substantial bodily harm 2. Section 1 -250. if a dog is brought to the City of Brooklyn Center that has acted in such a way in another jurisdiction as to qualify it as a dangerous dog, Brooklyn Center would want that dog to be subject to the requirements of the Brooklyn Center Ordinance. Demonstrating that the dog should be subject to the Ordinance can occur in two ways: by proof that the dog has acted in a certain way or by proof that some other jurisdiction has determined that the dog has acted in a certain way. It is passible, for example, that a dog has inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being in another jurisdiction and Brooklyn Center would be able to prove that had occurred even if the other jurisdiction did not have, or did not enforce, a dangerous dog ordinance. However, there may also be cases where the City of Brooklyn Center will not be in a position to prove that the dog inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being with independent evidence even if a dog has in fact inflicted harm on a human being (e.g. witnesses may not still be available). However, if the attack occurred in a jurisdiction that does have and enforce a dangerous dog ordinance and that jurisdiction has made a determination that the dog is dangerous, it would be relatively easy to demonstrate that the dog has been found to be dangerous in another jurisdiction. For example, if an owner brings a dangerous dog from the City of Rochester, it may be difficult for Brooklyn Center to prove that the dog inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being because the people who might otherwise provide evidence may not be available. However, if the City of Rochester has declared the dog to be dangerous, the City of Brooklyn Center would be able to enforce its dangerous dog ordinance on the basis of the determination in the City of Rochester. If the City of Rochester acted unreasonably, or if the City of Rochester has different standards than those in the City of Brooklyn Center, the owner of the dog could apply under proposed Brooklyn Center Code Section 1 -260 for a review of the determination. 3. Section 1 -255. The rights of dog owners cannot be taken away in a manner that violates the state or federal constitutional guarantees of due process of law. Due process requires, at a minimum, a statement of charges, and a right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal. If the City does not provide some means for procedural due process, it will be provided in a Court action. That is, if the City makes the decision of the animal control officer final, the only option available to the dog owner to challenge that determination the only way the owner can secure the due process to which he or she is entitled will be in District Court. If there is. no appeal process at the City, there will be no record of a hearing that can be reviewed by the District Court. Therefore, a trial will be de novo. In other words, the District Court judge will consider the evidence presented in court, in a trial, and make his or her own determination whether or not the dog is dangerous This is an undesirable alternative for several reasons. First, the owners of dogs may not feel that they have an opportunity for fair consideration of their side of the case by the City. Second, if the decision of the animal control office is final, and is not reviewed by any higher authority, such as the City Council, the City may find itself in court defending a decision made by an animal control officer even if the City Council would not have agreed eed with that decision. Third a decision b a District Court judge, reviewing 9 Y J 9 g the case de novo, gives no deference to the decision of the City. On the other hand, if the City gives the owner the right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal after reasonable notice, the owner loses the right to challenge that decision he or she does not request a hearing. This would make defending the case in Michael McCauley Dangerous d ogs_._ District Court relatively simple since the land owner would not have acted to request a hearing and preserve the right to appeal. If the decision of the City Council is appealed to Court, the City would have an argument that the decision should only be by certiorari, that is, based on a review of the record. In the case of review by certiorari, where the Court has an adequate record of the City's hearing to review, the judge does not substitute his or her judgment for the judgment of the City. Rather, the judge will review the record to determine whether there is evidence on the record supporting the decision of the City and, if so, the Court should affirm the decision of the City. The Ordinance could be amended to delete the provisions relating to the right of the owner to procedural due process, a hearing, and appeal to the City Council. However, this would simply mean that the owner of the dog would have direct access to the District Court. Therefore, I would not recommend that the section be deleted. 4. Section 1 -265. Comments on Section 1 -265 do not suggest changes to the draft Ordinance. 5. Section 1 -280. Section 1 -280 relates to the destruction of dogs in certain circumstances. As noted above, one of the purposes of Section 1 -255, which currently exists in the Code, is to give law enforcement officers the authority to deal with destruction of dogs in emergency situations such as a rabid or vicious dog that cannot be impounded without risk to persons. In such circumstances, there is no opportunity fora hearing before action is taken to destroy the animal. Summary destruction of an animal (.e. destruction without any prior hearing) can be justified in emergency situations. However, in situations other than such emergencies, the City cannot take property, such as a dog, without due process of law. Due process includes a right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal. For reasons stated above, I would not recommend deletion of Section 1 -255. Section 1 -255 provides a procedure, giving a dog owner a right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal, with a further right to an appeal to the City Council. The right to a hearing under Section 1 -255 is currently provided under Section 1- 280. Charlie CC: "Scott Bechthold (E- mail)" sbechthold @ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us> I �g00KLyN CE'Nr� BROOKLYN CENTER R POLICE DEPARTMENT POLIC MEMORANDUM TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Bechthold, Chief of Police DATE: March 17, 2004 SUBJECT: Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Dangerous Dogs The Brooklyn Center Police Department currently enforces violations of dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs under all applicable subdivisions of Minnesota Statute 347.50, subdivision 3. This statute is confusing and poorly drafted. The police department supports the adoption of the ordinance in order to make the statute operational by providing procedures, designated responsibilities, and fees. Backeround Under the current system, the community service officer (CSO) is the acting "animal control authority. The CSO, in most cases, will be the first responder to an initial incident when a dog bites a person or animal, or causes any other situation defined by statute. If during the course of the investigation, the CSO determines the dog's actions fall under the definitions of potentially dangerous or dangerous dog, the CSO handles the incident using the following unwritten procedures: 1. The dog owner is served with the "Notice of Potentially Dangerous Dog." 2. The dog owner is served with a microchip order that has a deadline of 14 days. 3. The case is referred to the city prosecutor if there is a violation. 4. Our notices also include a dangerous dog finding, however an incident has never been brought to our attention that required this classification. (In 2003, there was one dog whose actions would have risen to the level of a dangerous dog, but the dog was killed after attacking one of our officer's). 5 There was no formalized file or tracking system until March of this year. However, effectively immediately, all dogs involved in any aggressive behavior that is reported to police will now be tracked using a software program (Arcview). This software maps the location of each offending dog in the city and will be viewed at the department's weekly Crime Reduction Meetings. The information can also be viewed at nearly every computer in the police department and uses real- time mapping. This will insure appropriate actions are taken against all repeat offenders. In 2002, the department handled 13 dog bite calls. Out of those thirteen, eight calls involved dogs whose actions should have been classified as potentially dangerous. The department in 2003 handled 14 dog bite calls. Out of this number, there were three cases where notices were served, and seven cases where they should have been served. The police department had not used the potentially dangerous dog notice until 2003, because it was not aware of the forms existence until that time. March 17, 2004 Page 2 As previously stated, the department has followed a vague state statute and responded with unwritten procedures. This has created an inconsistent and deficient way of handling the problem. The police department is in the opinion that the ordinance would help remedy this problem, but there are three areas of concern that need to be considered. The first concern is that the conditions set forth in the proposed ordinance, with the exception of the $50,000 insurance requirement, are the same for a dog who is declared "potentially dangerous and "dangerous The state statue only requires a microchip condition for a potentially dangerous dog.. The police department feels this is a reasonable requirement. Conversely, the ordinance requires the dog owner of a potentially dangerous dog to house the dog in an enclosed property, and post signs on their property warning of a dangerous dog and tag their dog as potentially dangerous. Due to the fact that all dogs have the potential to be classified as potentially dangerous, we feel this will create additional staff time to manage compliance and process anticipated challenges from dog owners. Secondly, a consideration needs to be made regarding the time allowance for the dog owner to construct an enclosure for the dog, especially during the winter months. Finally, under the ordinance it states, "may require" a need for the dog to be sterilized. This may be too vague and have the potential to be arbitrarily applied. I would just like to conclude by answering some of the council members questions that have not already been addressed. As to the question about signage, there is a universal sign for posting and tagging used throughout the state of Minnesota. This sign will be available for viewing at the work -study session. In response to the question about the gentle leader, staff has conducted research and discovered numerous muzzles are safe for dogs and most are available for specific sizes and breeds. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of 2004, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance relating to the regulation of dogs. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please notify the Deputy City Clerk at 763 -569 -3308 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF DANGEROUS DOGS AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS IN THE CITY; AMENDING CHAPTER 1 OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Brooklyn Center City Code Chapter 1 is amended by adding new Sections 1 -250 through 1 -280 as follows: Section 1 -250. DEFINITIONS. For the Dumoses of Sections 1 -250 through 1 -280. the terms defined in this Section shall have the meaning given them. Terms not defined in this Section shall have the meaning given them in Section 1 -101 of this Code. 1. Dangerous dog. Dangerous dos means any dog that has: a. without provocation. inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private r�opertvj b. killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's propertv or C. been found to be potentially dangerous. and after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous. the dog aggressively bites. attacks. or endangers the safety of humans or domestic animals: or d. been determined to be a dangerous doe by the City or any other governmental Jurisdiction. 2. Potentially dangerous dog. Potentially dangerous dog means any dog that: a. when unprovoked. inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property; b. when unprovoked. chases or aAAroaches a person. including a person on a bicycle. upon the streets. sidewalks. or any Dublic or private nropertv. other than the doe owner's Dronertv. in an apparent attitude of attack: ORDINANCE NO. C. has a known propensity. tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked. causing iniury or otherwise threatening the safetv of humans or domestic animals; or d. been determined to be a potentially dangerous dog by the Citv or anv other governmental jurisdiction. 3. Prover Enclosure. Proper enclosure means securely confined indoors or in a securely enclosed and locked nen or structure suitable to urevent the animal from escaping and providing protection from the elements for the dog. A proper enclosure does not include a porch. patio, or anv part of a house. garage. or other structure that would allow the dog to exit of its own volition. or anv house or structure in which windows are open or in which door or window screens are the onlv obstacles that prevent the dog from exiting. 4. Owner. Owner means anv person. firm. cornoration. organization, or department possessing, harboring. keening. having an interest in. or having care. custody. or control of a dog. 5. Great bodilv harm. Great bodilv harm means bodilv iniury which creates a high probability of death. or which causes serious permanent disfigurement. or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of anv bodily member or organ or other serious bodily harm. 6. Substantial bodilv harm. Substantial bodily harm means bodily iniury which involves a temnorary but substantial disfigurement. or which causes a temnorary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of anv bodily member or organ. or which causes a fracture of anv bodily member. Section 1 -255. DECLARATION OF DANGEROUS OR POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOGS. 1. Notice to Owner. If the animal control officer determines after an investigation that a dog is potentially dangerous or dangerous according to the criteria in Section 1 -250 (1) or (2). the animal control officer will serve a notice of intent on the owner of the dog to declare the dog potentially dangerous or dangerous. Such notice shall inform the owner of this designation. the basis for the designation. the procedures for contesting the designation as described in Section 1 -255 (2) (a) and the result of the failure to contest the designation as described in Section 1 -255 (2) ORDINANCE NO. 2. Contesting Declaration of Dangerous or Potentially Dangerous Dogs. a: If the owner of a doe has received a notice of intent under Section 1 -255 (1). the owner may request that a hearing be conducted to determine whether or not such a designation is iustified. Such request must be made in writing and delivered to the City Manager within 14 days of receipt of the notice of intent. b. If the owner fails to contest the notice of intent within 14 days. the owner forfeits the right to a hearing_ and the declaration of the doe as potentially dangerous or dangerous is final. The City Manager will then issue a declaration to the owner and the owner must comDly with all applicable requirements of this Section or cause the doe to be humanely destroyed or removed from the City limits. 3. Hearing Procedure. .Within ten days after receiving the owner's request for a hearing. the City Manager will notifv the doe owner of the hearing date. The hearing will be scheduled within forty -five days. The hearing will be conducted by the Animal Control Review Panel. which will consist of three members. as aDDointed by the Mayor. The owner may call witnesses and present evidence on his or her behalf. A simple maiority of the members of the Panel is necessary for a finding that the dos is either dangerous or Dotentiallv dangerous. The Panel must inform the owner of its decision in writing and must state the reasons for its decision. 4. Effect of Findings. If the Panel finds that there is a sufficient basis to declare the dog votentially dangerous or dangerous, the owner must immediately comely with all applicable requirements of this Ordinance or immediately cause the doe to be humanely destroyed or removed from the City limits. 5. Anneal. If the owner of the doe disputes the decision of the Panel. the owner may anneal the decision of the Panel to the City Council. An anneal to the City Council must be in writing and submitted to the City Manager within 14 days of the Panel's decision. The owner may anneal the decision of the City Council in accordance with procedures under state law. Section 1 -260. REVIEW OF DECLARATION. Beginning six months after a doe is declared a votentially dangerous or dangerous dog. an owner may request annually that the Animal Control Officer review the designation. The owner must Drovide evidence that the doe's behavior has changed due to the doe's age. neutering. environment. comDletion of obedience training that includes des m odification of aggressive behavior, or :other factors. If the Animal Control Officer finds sufficient evidence that the doe's behavior has changed, the Dotentially dangerous or dangerous designation may be rescinded. ORDINANCE NO. Section 1 -265. REGISTRATION. I. Reouirement. No person may own a potentially dangerous or dangerous doe in the City unless the dog is registered as provided in this Section. 2. Certificate of Registration. The City Manager will issue a certificate of registration to the owner of a Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous dog if the owner presents sufficient evidence that: a. a Droner enclosure exists for the doe and all accesses to the premises are Dosted with clearly visible warning signs issued or approved by the Animal Control Officer. that there is a potentially dangerous or dangerous doe on the p ropertvi b. in the case of a dangerous dog only. a surety bond to be held by the City Clerk has been issued by a surety comDanv authorized to conduct business in this state in a form acceptable to the City Clerk and the City Attorney in the sum of at least $50.000. savable to any Derson iniured by the dangerous dog. or a Dolicv of liability insurance has been issued by an insurance comDanv authorized to conduct business in this state in the amount of at least $50.000. insuring the owner for any Dersonal iniuries inflicted by the dangerous dog C. the owner has Daid the annual registration fee as provided for in this Section: and d. the owner has had microchip identification implanted in the dangerous dog or Dotentiallv dangerous dog as reauired under Minn. Stat. &347.515. 3. Warning Sign. If the City issues a certificate of registration to the owner of a Dotentiallv dangerous dog or dangerous dog under Section 1 -265 (2). the City will provide, for posting on the owner's Dronerty. a covv of a warning symbol to inform children that there is a dangerous doe on the DroDertv. The City may charge the doe owner a reasonable fee to cover its administrative costs and the costs of the warning symbol. 4. Fee. The City will charge the owner an annual fee to obtain a certificate of registration for a potentially dangerous or dangerous doe. 5. Tau.A potentially dangerous or dangerous dog registered under this Section must have a tag. issued by the City. identifvine the dog as Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous. This tae must be axed to the dog's collar and wom by the dog at all times. ORDINANCE NO. 6. Exemption. Does may not be declared Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous if the threat, iniurv. or damage was sustained by a person: a. who was committing, at the time. a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of the dog: b. who was provoking. tormenting, abusing. or assaulting the dog or who can be shown to have repeatedly. in the east. provoked, tormented. abused. or assaulted the doe: or C. who was committing or attempting to commit a crime. 7. Law Enforcement Exemption. The provisions of this Section do not apply to dogs used by law enforcement officials for police work. Section 1 -270. POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS: ADDITIONAL REOUIREMENTS. 1. Enclosure. An owner of a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog shall keep the dog, while on the owner's Dropertv. in a proper enclosure. If the doe is outside the Droner enclosure. the dog must be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under the Dhvsical restraint of a resDonsible Derson. The muzzle must be made in a manner that will prevent the dog from biting any taerson or animal but that will not cause iniury to the dog or interfere with its vision or Lespiration. 2. Registration Renewal. An owner of a notentially dangerous or dangerous dog must renew the registration of the dog annually until the doe is deceased. If the doe is removed from the jurisdiction. it must be registered as a Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous dog in its new iurisdiction. 3. Death or Transfer. An owner of a Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous dog must notify the Animal Control Officer in writing of the death of the dog or its transfer. and must, if reauested by the Animal Control Officer. execute an affidavit under oath setting forth either the circumstances of the dog's death and disDosition or the complete name. address. and telephone number of the person to whom the dog has been transferred. 4. Sterilization. The Animal Control Officer may require a Dotentiallv dangerous or dangerous dog to be sterilized at the owner's expense. If the owner does not have the animal sterilized. the Animal Control Officer may have the animal sterilized at the owner's expense. ORDINANCE NO. 5. Rental Pronertv. A person who owns a potentially dangerous or dangerous dog and who rents Pronertv from another where the doe will reside must disclose to the property owner prior to entering the lease agreement and at the time of anv lease renewal that the Berson owns a potentially dangerous or dangerous dos that will reside at the propertv. 6. Sale. A person who sells a potentially dangerous or dangerous dos must notifv the nurchaser that the Animal Control Officer has identified the dog as potentially dangerous or dangerous. The seller must also notifv the Animal Control Officer with the new owner's name. address. and telephone number. Section 1 -275. SEIZURE. 1. Immediate Seizure. The Animal Control Officer or anv police officer mav immediately seize anv potentially dangerous or dangerous dog if: a. within 14 days after the owner has notice that the dos is notentially dangerous or dangerous. the dog is not registered as required under Section 1 -265: b. in the case of a dangerous dos. within 14 days after the owner has notice that the doe is dangerous. the owner does not secure the Droner liability insurance or surety coverage as required under Section 1 -265 (2) (b): C. the dos is not maintained in the Droner enclosure: d. the dos is outside the proper enclosure and not under nhvsical restraint of a responsible person: or e. after the owner has been notified that the dog is potentially dangerous or dangerous. the dos bites or attacks a person or domestic animal. 2. Reclaimed. A potentially dangerous or dangerous dos seized under Section -1 -275 (1) mav be reclaimed by the owner of the doe upon navment of impounding and boarding fees. and presenting proof to the Animal Control Officer that the requirements of Section 1 -265 and Section 1 -270 will be met. A dog not reclaimed within seven days of seizure mav be disposed of as provided in Minn. Stat. &35.71. subdivision 3. The owner is liable to the Citv for costs incurred in confmine and disposing of the dos. ORDINANCE NO. 3. Subseauent Offenses. If a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a provision of Section 1 -265 or 1 -270. and the person is charged with a subsequent violation relating to the same dog. the Animal Control Officer may seize the doe. If the owner is convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized. the City may destrov the dog in a proper and humane manner and the owner is responsible for navin¢ the cost of confining and destroying the animal. If the person is not convicted of the crime for which the dog was seized. the owner may reclaim the dog upon pavment to the City of a fee for the care and boarding of the dog. If the dog is not reclaimed by the owner within seven days after the owner has been notified that the dog may be reclaimed. the doe may be disnosed of as provided under Minn. Stat. 635.71. subdivision 3. The owner is liable to the City for the costs incurred in confining. impounding. and disnosina of the dos. Section 1 -280. DESTRUCTION OF DOG IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Notwithstanding Section 1 -265 to 1 -275. a dog that inflicts substantial or great bodily harm on a human being on public or private propertv without provocation may be destroyed in a Droner and humane manner by the Animal Control Officer. The dog may not be destroyed until the dog owner has had the onnortunity for a hearing as described in Section 1 -255. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of .200-4. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Dater (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) 470 Pillsbury Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337 -9300 telephone (612) 337 -9310 fax C H A R T E R E o http: /www.kennedy- graven.com CHARLES L. LEFEvERE Attorney at Law Direct Dial (612) 337 -9215 Email: clefevere@kmnedy- gmven.com September 3, 2003 Mr. Michael McCauley City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Sl gle Creek Pkwy Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re: Re>?ulation of Doas Dear Mike: We have previously discussed certain information about the regulation of dogs in general, and potentially dangerous dogs and dangerous dogs in particular. The Council requested a list of additional regulations that it might consider for regulation of dogs. First, for background information, State law provides certain definitions for dangerous dogs and potentially dangerous dogs, in Minn. Stat. 347.50, subd. 2 and 3: Subd. 2. Dangerous dog. "Dangerous dog" means any dog that has: (1) without provocation, inflicted substantial bodily harm on a human being on public or private property; (2) killed a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's property; or (3) been found to be potentially dangerous, and after the owner has notice that the dog is potentially dangerous, the dog aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers the safety. of humans or domestic animals. Subd. 3. Potentially dangerous dog. "Potentially dangerous dog" means any dog that: (1) when unprovoked, inflicts bites on a human or domestic animal on public or private property; (2) when unprovoked, chases or approaches a person, including a person on a bicycle, upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public or private CLL- 236939v1 BR291 4. Mike McCauley Letter September 3, 2003 Page 2 property, other than the dog owner's property, in an apparent attitude of attack; or (3) has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, causing injury or otherwise threatening the safety of humans or domestic animals. The term "substantial bodily harm" is defined in Minn. Stats. 609.02, subd. 7a as follows: Subd. 7a. Substantial bodily harm. "Substantial bodily harm" means bodily injury which involves a temporary but substantial disfigurement, or which causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or which causes a fracture of any bodily member. The attached table shows existing local and state regulations relating to dogs, potentially dangerous and dangerous dogs, and additional restrictions that the City Council may wish to consider. In addition, I would recommend the state law provisions on dangerous dogs and potentially dangerous dogs be incorporated into the City Code and that procedures be established for making dangerous dog and potentially dangerous dog determinations by the City. Very truly yours, C Charles L. LeFevere CLL :peb Enclosure CLL- 236939v1 BR291 4 RESTRICTIONS SANCTIONS IN ADDITION TO PROSECUTION Existing Additional Existing Additional All Dogs 1 -110 nuisance to keep dog 19 -105 can order nuisance lose right to keep dogs if in manner that abated excessive dog -at -large unreasonably annoys charges 1 -1 I I cannot run at large impound dog if excessive 19 -104 only 2 dogs older dog -at -large charges than 6 months Microchip identification Add restrictions applicable add sanctions applicable Potentially to dangerous dogs to dangerous dogs Dangerous Dogs dog must be registered annual fee dangerous dog can be killed if it must be enclosed in proper require sterilization can't be impounded without Dangerous Dogs enclosure no more than one dangerous serious risk or it has made more posted warning on property dog per household than one attack on a person $50,000 insurance (City Code) annual fee up to $500 MS347.56 authorizes animal microchip identification control authority to destroy a muzzled and leashed if dog that has inflicted outside its enclosure substantial or great bodily harm may require sterilization on a human notification to landlord MS 347.54 dog may be seized required if restrictions violated and court notification to purchaser of may order destruction of dog dog required upon conviction dangerous dog tag MS 347.54 dog seized for second violation and destroyed upon conviction CLL- 234875v1 BR291 4 City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community To; Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe From: Michael J. McCaule City Manager Date: March 16, 2004 Re: Council Handbook 1. Council Member Niesen i. E -mail policy Council Member Niesen would like to discuss potential revision of the Council's e-mail policy on page 13 of the Handbook to allow e- mail communications between/among council members limited to topics that do not relate to City business or agendas. She provided examples such as notification of inability to attend specific meetings, sharing good news such as eagles, and forwarding articles of general interest. She also suggests putting in language from the Open Meeting law. Council Member Niesen's comments: Email, p.13: inflexibility. Adding information J.1. is new territory, undertaken because the subject of Open Mtg Law kept coming up in regards to email policy and practices. Seeing it in print, however, it struck me as something very inflexible in our new technology age. T would like to discuss this passage in the first quarter of the year. Perhaps a better place to start is with good Guidance, which might preclude such prescription as to only email others for but one purpose. If we could take initial steps with Guidance and see how that goes, vs. prescription, it would give leeway to email, for example, shared stories of success and good news, or personal information about ourselves (we have these retreats...) or others that is proper to convey. My initial stab at an entry: Council members emailing between/among themselves will limit topics to non City agenda/business information. Proper email topics would include notification of inability to attend specific meetings, sharing good news (eagles), forwarded articles of general interest, etc. (But, as per MN State Statute (xxx.xx) stipulates, and then include quotes from Open Mtg law if fitting, here.) 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityolbrooklyncenter.org r 2. Revised informational pages There were several updates needed for the informational pages of the Council Handbook These pages are informational and not reflective of City Council policy or rules that are adopted by the City Council. Attached are revised informational pages: Page 4 on executive sessions Page 20 maximum fine Page 22 purchasing policy dates eliminated Page 23 number of municipal liquor stores 3. Revised format I am proposing to reformat the City Council Handbook into 3 or 4 sections. The 1S section would be City Council policies and rules. These would be the current pages 4 through 19. These are sections that generally reflect rules or policies adopted by the City Council governing the conduct of City Council meetings and e -mail etc. There are a few provisions that may be removed to the informational section such as information on attending conferences. We would also annotate the sections to reference the City Council resolution or action creating or amending a policy or rule. The 2 section would contain general information for Council members which is prepared by staff that does not involve Council policy or rules. The 3 d section would be an appendix of materials similar to the current appendix, but with a table of contents. This division of sections would be clearer in delineating actual operating rules and policies from background information, giving more clarity to the handbook. If this general approach would be desirable, we would proceed to prepare a revised compilation of those sections adopted by the City Council and organize them into one Resolution adopting "Rules and Policies governing City Council `Meetings and Procedures This would then be the first section of a revised City Council reference book that would contain general information and appendices in a more organized framework with an expanded set of tabs to make the book more user friendly. ADMINISTRATION OF COUNCIL AFFAIRS Council Meetings City Councils can exercise their powers, both governmental and proprietary, only in meetings that comply with the following requirements: Open Meeting Law The State's Open Meeting Law, with a few minor exceptions, specifies that all meetings must be open to the public and that all votes taken must be recorded in a journal which is available to the public. Quorum, A quorum (or a certain minimum number of members) must be present. A Council quorum in Brooklyn Center is three members. Regular Meetings The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center shall hold meetings in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, on the second and fourth Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. No meeting will be held on a legal holiday, but a regular meeting shall be held at the same hour on the next succeeding day that is not a holiday. Regular meetings will be cablecast and the videotapes will be retained for three months after approval of the official minutes of the meeting. The written Council minutes are the permanent record for the City. Informal Open Forum with City Council The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center shall hold an Informal Open Forum at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, at 6:45 p.m. prior to the Regular meetings, which are held on the second and fourth Mondays of each month. Informal Open Forum provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items that are not on the agenda. Informal Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Executive Sessions Executive Sessions are closed meetings (non public) called by the Council to discuss pul}liely- seasitive a limited number of exceptions to the general requirement that City Council meetings be open to the public such as issues related to 1) City labor negotiations, 2) ongoing or imminent litigation involving the City as a legal party, or 3) employee per-fefmmee Positions appointed dir-ectly by Getmeil certain limited employment matters. State law requires that the media and other interested parties be notified of Executive Session dates and times, and that a brief synopsis be given concerning the issues discussed. City of Brooklyn Center Page 4 LEGISLATIVE POWERS Ordinances, Resolutions, and Motions In statutory cities and most home rule cities a Council takes official action through either an ordinance or a resolution. An "ordinance" is a City law that regulates or governs people or property and provides a penalty for its violation, or that sets a permanent rule for the organization and procedure of the local government. A "resolution" is any action of a temporary or administrative nature such as the ordering of assessments, the letting of contracts, and other routine actions in the conduct of the City's business. The distinction between an ordinance and resolution is in subj ect matter, not terminology. A Council cannot change an ordinance into a resolution merely by changing its name. Nor can a Council bypass the procedural requirements for the passage and publication of an ordinance by calling an enactment a resolution. However, a resolution a Council passes and publishes with all the formalities necessary for passing an ordinance is equivalent to an ordinance. Where there is any question about the classification of a particular piece of legislative business, the Council should consult with the City Attorney. As previously mentioned, the City of Brooklyn Center has its ordinances codified within the City Code. Another type of Council action is called a "motion." This type of action is a parliamentary term except where a home rule charter prescribes otherwise. It refers to a formal proposal which brings a question before the Council for deliberation. Usually, motions only require a majority vote of a Council quorum to pass. Section 3.04 through 3.11 of the City Charter identifies a variety of legislative procedures to be followed in ordinance, resolution and motion usage. Relationship Ordinances to State Law Local ordinances must not contradict or be inconsistent with state laws covering the same subject. In general, a City may pass stricter regulations, but it may not be more lenient in its laws than the corresponding state statutes. This holds true in all legislative action taken by Council. In some cases, a state law may "pre empt the field" meaning a City cannot legislate on the subject at all. Cities sometimes pass ordinances which contain the same provisions as a corresponding state law. For example, in order to have all the effective provisions in one body of law, local ordinances might restate state liquor laws for their jurisdiction. Ordinances, in a specific sense, are the laws of the community. They do, in many cases, carry criminal penalties of a fine and/or imprisonment. In Brooklyn Center, violators are subject to misdemeanor prosecution that carries penalties of imprisonment and a maximum $71,000 fine, or both should the offense warrant it. City of Brooklyn Center Page 20 SPECIFIC COUNCIL FUNCTIONS This section lists some of the more important functions of the City Council. The list is by no means all inclusive. More extensive information on most of these functions is available in the City Code. Auditing Disbursements All City disbursements are reviewed and approved by the Finance Department. The check register is submitted to the Mayor and City Manager for approval. If City Council members are interested, copies of the check register can be made available for their review. The City Manager and Treasurer are required to sign all checks that disburse City funds. The Mayor and Treasurer are required to sign all checks that disburse E.D.A. funds. In addition, the City Manager serves as 1) the Chief Accounting Officer responsible for the proper accounting of all City monies, as 2) the Chief Budget Officer responsible for the development and strict enforcement of the annual budget, and 3) as the Chief Purchasing Officer responsible for the letting and making of contracts and purchases subject to Charter restrictions, along with other related duties associated with meeting the cash flow requirements of the City. In most instances, the City Manager has delegated these responsibilities to the appropriate City staff. However, the ultimate responsibility for the supervision and proper execution of these functions belongs to the City Manager. Board of Appeal and Equalization Under the City's Charter, the Council shall constitute a Board of Appeal and Equalization. The Board meets between April 1 and June 30 annually to examine the City's assessment rolls, to determine that all assessments of taxable property in the district have been legal and just, and to hear and determine complaints from taxpayers. The Council, pursuant to Section 7.04 of the City Charter, serves as the Board of Appeal and Equalization to equalize assessments of property for taxation purposes each year. The date of the meeting is selected by the Council and submitted to the County. Purchasing and Letting Contracts Under the City's Charter, the City Council shall by resolution establish and maintain a purchasing policy for the city. The purchasing policy was last =evil d on May 13, 1996, c ontains dollar thresholds for advertising for bids and letting contracts adopting the Uniform Municipal Contracting Law set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345. The City Manager is the Chief Purchasing Officer of the City and is authorized to let bids for contracts and make purchases for up to $50,000. All contracts over $50,000 are awarded by the City Council. All contracts over $50,000 must be advertised for bids. City of Brooklyn Center Page 22 City Council Handbook Elections City Councils are responsible for the conduct of all elections within their jurisdiction. This includes appointing election judges for the actual election and serving as the Election Canvass Board to certify the results of the municipal election. In Brooklyn Center, the City Clerk has administrative responsibility for elections within the City. Levying Taxes Within the limits of City charters and various state laws, Councils have the power to levy taxes and otherwise raise revenues for their cities. Under the City's Charter, the Council has the express powers to raise money by taxation pursuant to the laws of the State of Minnesota. Each year, the City is required to hold a public meeting(s) called Truth in Taxation for the purpose of explaining to their constituency the manner, the levels, and the objectives of City spending. Budget documents developed by the City are an excellent tool for Council Members to explain to their constituencies the nature of City expenditures. The Office of the City Manager is always available should you have questions about property taxes and other sources of City revenue. Public Improvements and Activities Cities, through their Councils, are also responsible for installing and maintaining public infrastructure improvements such as City and public safety facilities, streets and stormwater systems, street and traffic lights, public parks and recreation structures, and water and sewage mains and systems. If these improvements result in a special benefit to particular parcels of property, the City can use special assessments to help defray the cost. The City of Brooklyn Center, in addition to those public service functions just listed, also has responsibility for tree two municipal liquor stores, a municipal golf course, a swimming pool, the Earle Brown Heritage Center, and several ice rinks. These engineering and public benefit projects include, but are not limited to, planning and zoning, housing and redevelopment, recycling and solid waste activities, sidewalk replacement, and a variety of other projects as may be authorized by the Council. Regulation and Licensing The City of Brooklyn Center has the authority and is required, under statute and Charter, to regulate and license certain businesses and occupations. In addition, under their general policy powers, the City may license a wide variety of occupations which affect public health, safety, morals, or welfare. They may also regulate, through licensing, potential nuisances within their jurisdiction. Thus, cities have the authority to require licenses for liquor establishments, contractors, dogs, etc. If the licensing ordinance includes definite standards, the Council can usually give administrative officials the authority to issue licenses. Licenses cannot be a means for raising revenue, except in a few special cases, such as liquor licenses. City of Brooklyn Center Page 23 0�ppKLYN CENTF BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICE MEMORANDUM TO: Michael McCauley, City Manager FROM: Scott Bechthold, Chief of Police DATE: March 17, 2004 SUBJECT: Taxi Ordinance Update The police department recommends taxicab licensing by the City to ensure that the vehicles being used are clearly identifiable, in safe operating condition, insured, and the drivers are licensed and reliable moral character. The taxicab ordinance will give us some control of these issues, with less time constraints, by making the taxicab owner and/or driver responsible for obtaining and supplying criminal history checks, drivers license information, insurance, and vehicle inspections. Currently, Lieutenant Lund and the city attorney's office are finalizing a draft of the ordinance. The draft ordinance will specify the following requirements: Puts the burden on the owner and/or driver to provide criminal history, driver's license information, and vehicle inspections Requires specific markings and cosmetic appearance Requires insurance requirements Requires the owner to maintain a current file on all taxicabs and drivers Requires the owner to maintain order slips by calendar year Requires the owner to make all business records and vehicles available to the City of Brooklyn Center for inspection Allows for the revocation of a taxicab license for specified violations or conduct Allows for a penalty clause making violations of this section a misdemeanor Questions that need to be answered at city staff level and things yet to do: Who will be responsible for reviewing the completed applications, specifically the criminal history, driver's license, insurance, etc. Who will be responsible for conducting audits to make sure compliance is being met Staff are in the process of redesigning the application form Staff are in the process of developing a vehicle inspection form It is my intent that the questions will be resolved, the forms designed and a draft of the ordinance will be ready for Council's review in April. City of Brooklyn Center A Millennium Community To: Mayor Kragness and Council Members Carmody, Lasman, Niesen, and Peppe From: Michael J. McCauley City Manager Date: March 16, 2004 Re Social Service Funding V Council policy provides for an annual review of social service funding in February, with direction in March on whether to include joint powers and services dependent on City funding in the budget. The 2004 was reduced to 3 services in the social service category: 5 Cities Senior Transportation $11,500 Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council $12,252 Project Peace $49,272 Project Peace provides domestic abuse services and results in both better resources for victims and less time spent by the police department. The service has in the past been the lowest cost of the available options. Northwest Hennepin Human Services leverages grant dollars for many programs and activities in Brooklyn Center. Loss of Northwest Hennepin Human Services would reduce social service opportunities and negatively impact staffing since city staff would receive the requests that are handled through Northwest Hennepin Human Services. Examples would be the Success by 6, workforce development grants, and other issues that come forward. By participating in a consortium, each City does not have to familiarize itself with programs, requirements, and re- invent the wheel. Since the 2004 budget process eliminated social service funding except for the _3 areas identified above after significant review of social service funding, I would recommend that we assume inclusion of Northwest Hennepin Human Services and Project Peace in the 2005 budget. Project Peace might actually be more appropriately located in the police portion of the budget as it is directly related to domestic violence and positively impacts demands on police personnel time. If the City Council would concur in this approach, the item for discussion would be the Council's direction on 5 Cities Transportation for 2005. 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Recreation and Community Center Phone TDD Number Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -2199 (763) 569 -3400 City Hall TDD Number (763) 569 -3300 FAX (763) 569 -3434 FAX (763) 569 -3494 www.cityofbrooklyncenter.org