Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 07-13 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JULY 13, 1987 7 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Invocation 4. Open Forum 5. Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Council member so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 6. Approval of Minutes: *a. June 22, 1987 - Regular Session 7. Performance Bond Release: *a. Lutterman Homes, 6117 -23 Beard Avenue North *b. River Road Dental, 412 66th Avenue North 8. Resolutions: a. Scheduling Public Hearing on the Establishment of an Economic Development Authority in the City *b. Acknowledging Gift from the Scale Flyers of Minnesota and the Grassfield R/C Club, Inc. -Model builders club donation for use in Community Center meeting room. C. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Kenneth Smith *d. Accepting Work Performed under Contract 1987 -F (Municipal Service Garage Heating, Improvement Project No. 1987 -07) e. Approving Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids, Improvement Project No. 1985 -12, Contract 1987 -K (Dallas Road repair between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North) *f. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1987 -G (1987 Sealcoating Program, Improvement Project No. 1987 -09) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 13, 1987 *g. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1987 -J (East Palmer Lake Trail Improvement Project 1987 -12) *h. Declaring a Public Nuisance and Ordering the Removal of Diseased Shade Trees (Order No. DST 07/13/87) i. Dissolving the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee and Establishing a Traffic Appeals Committee 9. Public Hearing: (7:30 p.m.) a. Proposed Financing Program for Multifamily Housing Development (Maranatha Nursing Home) 1. Resolution Reciting a Proposal for a Financing Program for a Multifamily Rental Housing Development (The "Project "), Giving Preliminary Approval to the Project and the Financing Program Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, Authorizing the Issuance of Revenue Bonds, Authorizing the Submission of the Financing Program ram g for Approval to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency and Authorizing the Preparation of Necessary Documents and Materials in Connection with the Project and Financing Program 10. Ordinances: (8 p.m.) a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances Regarding Personnel -This item was first read on June 22, 1987, published in the City's official newspaper on July 2, 1987, and is offered this evening for a second reading. b. An Ordinance Vacating Easement Along Easterly Side of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown First Addition -This ordinance is offered this evening for a first reading. C. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Zoning -This amendment is a housekeeping change incorporating Section 35 -200 into Section 35 -202 (on comprehensive planning) and is offered this evening for a first reading. d. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding Appointment of Special Police Officers -This amendment will delete the section on appointment of special police officers to make our ordinance consistent with State law. This item is offered this evening for a first reading. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- July 13, 1987 e. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances to Prohibit the Disturbance Caused by a Barking, Howling, or Fighting Animal -This amendment will allow for stronger enforcement of barking dog regulations. This item is offered this evening for a first reading. 11. Discussion Items: a. I -694 Reconstruction Project - MNDOT representatives will attend the meeting to discuss this proposed improvement project, plans and schedules. 1. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications for the Improvement of T.H. 694 2. Resolution Approving a Request from MNDOT for a Variance for Established Working Hour Restrictions for Work on T.H. 694 b. MTC Public Hearing Regarding Proposed Schedule Change to Route #26 -MTC will conduct a hearing on July 22, 1987, to discuss the proposed discontinuance of Saturday service on Route #26, between 53rd Avenue North and 55th Avenue North. It is recommended the City Council conduct a hearing to discuss this matter on July 27, 1987. C. City Engineer's Report Regarding Sidewalks on Camden Avenue North between 53rd Avenue and 55th Avenue North -It is recommended the City Council conduct a hearing to discuss this matter on July 27, 1987. d. Brooklyn Center Housing Commission Year 2000 Report e. Pay Equity Implementation Plan 1. Resolution Amending the 1987 Employee Position and Classification Plan *12. Licenses 13. Adjournment . 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 JUNE 22, 1987 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:07 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor Zeimes of Brooklyn United Methodist Church. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the Consent Agenda. No requests were made and he continued with the regular agenda items. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT - HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESOURCES COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to appoint Susan Larsen to the Human Rights and Resources Commission. The motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND REDUCTIONS There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to reduce the performance bond for Brookdale Corporate Center Phase II to $10,000. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to reduce the performance bond for Brookview Plaza to $10,000. The motion passed unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to release the performance bond for the property at 4315 70th Avenue North. The motion passed unanimously. 6 -22 -87 _1_ L' FINAL RLS APPROVAL - MAINSTREET There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to give final approval for the RLS for Mainstreet, 2501 County Road 10. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 87 -126 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1986 -N (HUMBOLDT SIDEWALK, 69TH AVENUE TO 71ST AVENUE AND 72ND AVENUE TO WOODBINE LANE) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -127 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -13 (SATELLITE /DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES) CONTRACT 1987 -H The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -128 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1987 GENERAL FUND BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -129 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN CLINIC OF COUNSELING, INC. AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR AN EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Drive FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Food Express 1131 Brookdale Mall 0 6 -22 -87 -2- ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Scoreboard Pizza 6816 Humboldt Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Care Heating and A /C, Inc. 1211 Old Highway 8 Cronstrom's Heating and A /C, Inc. 4410 Excelsior Blvd. RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Paul Hinck 4715 France Avenue North Renewal: Lang- Nelson Associates Chalet Court Apartments Brian A. Patnode 5916 Bryant Avenue North Douglas Williams 5107 Drew Avenue North Carlin Shefveland 5308 Emerson Avenue North B. F. Dabrowski 5001 Ewing Avenue North Marcus Corporation 6415 James Circle North Tracy Rice 6907 Morgan Avenue North Richard Ploof 5319 Queen Avenue North Shingle Creek Tower 6221 Shingle Creek Pk Robert Schmidt g h 1425 55th Avenue North Bobby Robson 1107 57th Avenue North Edward Doll 1201 57th Avenue North John Byrnes 3019 63rd Avenue North T. W. Thorbus 4300 63rd Avenue North Merle G. Biggs 3910 65th Avenue North Joseph Roche 824 69th Avenue North Dennis Peterson 4811 69th Avenue North Myrna L. Hubert 5300 70th Circle North TAXICAB LICENSE Yellow Suburban 3555 5th Avenue South The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 8 1987 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the June 8, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed. Councilmember Lhotka abstained from the vote as he was not present at this meeting. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Water Main Improvement Project No. 1987 -16 (Paul Drive Water Main), Accepting Quotations and Approving Contracts Therefor. The Director of Public Works stated there is a problem with water quality in this area due to a dead end water main located on Paul Drive. He stated Council previously approved the installation of a new water main loop for this area and quotations were accepted for the project. 6 -22 -87 _3_ r RESOLUTION NO. 87 -130 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -16 (PAUL DRIVE WATER MAIN), ACCEPTING QUOTATIONS AND APPROVING CONTRACTS THEREFOR The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEM STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND REFUSE The City Manager stated the number of complaints regarding storage of vehicles and refuse is steadily increasing. He noted the problem is not so much what is stored, but how the storage area is maintained and where the storage area is located. He briefly reviewed the seven recommendations prepared by the staff and stated he also has some slides showing the different type of storage problems. Councilmember Theis inquired if a section could be written into the ordinance requiring people to install concrete or asphalt to make maintenance of the storage area easier. The City Manager stated some communities do have a section in their ordinance requiring this, but it does not necessarily solve the problem. He stated some communities have had residents pave their entire front yard to allow them more storage area. Councilmember Lhotka stated he believes this issue should be looked into more thoroughly. The City Manager stated as the City grows older the staff will have to address these type of ordinance violations more strongly and not react only when a complaint is received. Councilmember Hawes stated he is concerned with the problem of residents who block sidewalks with their cars. The City Manager stated the City does have an ordinance which addresses this problem, and once residents are aware of the ordinance they do not usually block the sidewalk. Councilmember Hawes inquired about residents parking cars in their front yard with for sale signs on them. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the City has no ordinance prohibiting the sale of your personal vehicle from your home; it only restricts parking on the easement. Mayor Nyquist stated he would like to continue discussion of this item later in the meeting after the scheduled public hearings have been held. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87009 SUBMITTED BY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 279 REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO OPERATE A CHILD CARE CENTER FOR SCHOOL CHILDREN FROM ORCHARD LANE AND GARDEN CITY SCHOOLS AT THE CROSS OF GLORY CHURCH AT 5929 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its June 11, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning & Inspection referred the Mayor and City Council to pages one through four of the June 11, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and the attached informational sheet with those minutes. He noted a child care center would be a permitted special use in an R1 zone. He briefly reviewed the narrative submitted by the school district and also reviewed the six conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. He 6 -22 -87 -4- r ' stated a public hearing has been scheduled this evening and notices have been sent. Councilmember Scott inquired if there would be any regulations which would control the number of children allowed to enroll in the program. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the occupancy standards and building capacity codes would have to be considered when figuring enrollment size. Councilmember Hawes stated he had some concerns regarding the play area proposed for the parking lot and the traffic from the parking lot. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the traffic from the adjoining office building is presently blocked off from the lot. What little cut through traffic comes through the church parking lot would not be a significant risk for the children if they are supervised. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87009 submitted by Independent School District No. 279. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing, no one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87009. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87009 submitted by Independent School District No. 279 subject to the following conditions: 1. The standards for a special use permit are deemed to be met on the basis of the following: a) the proposed child care operation will enhance the general public welfare by providing needed child care services in a safe location. b) the proposed child care center should have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties. c) traffic entering and exiting the site are expected to travel predominately via Brooklyn Boulevard rather than local neighborhood streets. 2. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 3. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 4. The operation is limited to the main floor of the church building for reasons of exiting and fire safety. 6 -22 -87 -5- r � 5. The applicant shall obtain a food establishment license as determined by the Sanitarian prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 6. The applicant shall comply with all code requirements pertaining to exiting, etc. in the Building Inspector's memo of June 9, 1987, prior to issuance of the special use permit. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:53 p.m. and reconvened at 8:09 p.m. CONSIDERATION TO DENY THE RENEWAL OF THE RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE FOR 4010 65TH AVENUE NORTH The Director of Planning & Inspection stated staff is recommending denial of the renewal of this rental dwelling license for noncompliance with the ordinances. He stated in 1982, under Planning Commission Applic�, No. 82044, the City Council approved a three unit building for this address. He stated the building permit was issued for a three -plex with a combination laundry, utility, storage /recreation area for the remaining floor area. He noted at the time of completion the building inspector had some concerns a fourth unit could easily be installed in this extra space. He went on to briefly review his memorandum and the events which have led up to the staff recommendation. He stated at the time of renewal this spring it was noted there were four mail boxes for the building, four phone numbers, and other tenants have stated there are four occupant spaces being rented. The Director of Planning & Inspection went on to address the letter received from Mr. Fudali, attorney for Mr. Hamm. He stated the issue is not whether the building is a three unit or four unit building. He noted Council approved the building as a three -plex and has licensed it as such since 1983. He noted Mr. Hamm was advised and well aware of the conditions and consequences if the building were rented as more than a three -plex. He noted Mr. Fudali makes some references to a variance and added a variance could only be approved if the four standards for granting a variance are met. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated staff recommends Mr. Hamm try to acquire additional land adjacent to his property which would permit him to rent the buildings as a four - plex. Councilmember Theis inquired what provisions are made by denying the renewal of the license or revocation. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the owner cannot rent any vacant apartments until a license has been renewed or reinstated. Mayor Nyquist recognized Joe Hamm who stated he does not understand why he cannot rent the lower half of the building as two units. He stated he has never had more than three people living in the lower half of the building at one time. He stated the Planning & Inspection department was aware he was renting his building this way, and he notified the department and no one ever came to look at it. Mayor Nyquist stated he is very concerned with Mr. Hamm's apparent lack 6 -22 -87 -6- JO " of integrity and the fact he is contradicting the facts which his attorney stated. Mr. Hamm stated he does have four tenants living in the building but only three leases have been signed. He stated the third lease is signed jointly by the two tenants from the lower units. Councilmember Lhotka inquired what form of notification Mr. Hamm used for informing the Planning & Inspection department. Mr. Hamm stated the building inspector called to ask him how many units were being rented in the building, and he told the inspector at that time of the exact arrangements. Councilmember Hawes inquired if there is additional land available for Mr. Hamm to acquire. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated at the time the building was constructed there was additional land adjacent to Mr. Hamm's property. He stated at this time he is not sure what the status is of this additional property, but no development has taken place on it. Councilmember Theis inquired what the suttle changes were that took place in the recreation room. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated a separate entrance to the laundry and recreation room has been created, a bathroom installed, counter tops, cabinets, and a kitchen sink have also been installed. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to deny the renewal of a rental dwelling license for 4010 65th Avenue North. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances Regarding Personnel. He noted this item would amend sections of the personnel ordinance related to vacation time, sick leave, and leaves of absence and is offered this evening for a first reading. Councilmember Theis inquired how this amendment would affect the sick leave accruals for employees. The City Manager stated this would allow the banking of sick leave hours for the hiring of new employees. He noted at this time he has the authority to grant accruals for vacation leave but not sick leave. He stated this amendment would make the ordinance more consistent. Councilmember Theis stated he has some concerns about giving such broad authority to grant leaves without the Council's approval. The City Manager stated a "not to exceed..." 'unit could be placed in the ordinance if the Council so wished. Councilmember Theis stated he would have no problem giving approval for a first reading if limits are placed to allow for more Council control. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances Regarding Personnel. The motion passed unanimously. The public hearing was set for July 13, 1987, at 8 p.m. DISCUSSION ITEMS (CONTINUED) STORAGE OF VEHICLES AND REFUSE The City Manager briefly reviewed the slides depicting the different type of 6 -22 -87 -7- I problems and complaints the City receives regarding storage of vehicles and refuse. Councilmember Scott stated she would like to see the staff do more work on the seven recommendations submitted this evening and would also like to modify item No. 3. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the possibility of limiting the number of vehicles per residence. Councilmember Scott stated she did not feel it is the number of vehicles which is creating the complaints but where and how they are stored. She stated she did not believe the City could penalize large families by allowing a certain amount of vehicles. The City Manager stated it appears there is a general consensus staff should start addressing the seven recommendations and noted modifications would be made to recommendation Nos. 3 and 7. He noted No. 4 is currently being addressed by the Housing Commission. He stated staff would also investigate the possibility of placing a regulation regarding paving of storage areas and limiting the amount of paving. ADVISORY COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS AND BYLAWS The City Manager stated the Council has reviewed the Advisory Commission Resolutions and Bylaws and the recommended changes have been made to the proposed resolutions for this evening's meeting. Councilmember Theis inquired what the definition of unexcused absence is. The Personnel Coordinator stated if a commission member does not notify staff or the chairperson that they will not be in attendance the absence is considered unexcused. If notification is received, the absence is excused. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -131 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73 -140 WHICH CREATED THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION AND DEFINED ITS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 75 -97 WHICH AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 73 -140; AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 77 -22 WHICH FURTHER DEFINED DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -132 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 68 -44 WHICH CREATED THE BROOKLYN CENTER HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, AND DEFINED ITS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES; AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 71 -211 WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMMISSION'S COMPOSITION; AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 74 -68 WHICH FURTHER DEFINED DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES, COMPOSITION, METHOD OF SELECTION, TERM OF OFFICE AND REMOVAL FROM THE COMMISSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -133 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 6 -22 -87 -8- y RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 73 -25 WHICH CONTINUED THE BROOKLYN CENTER PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION AND REDEFINED ITS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AND AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 77 -52 WHICH REDEFINED THE APPOINTMENTS OF PARK SERVICE AREA COMMITTEE MEMBERS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -134 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 87 -87 WHICH DEFINES DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER PLANNING COMMISSION THEREFOR The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -135 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DISSOLVING THE BROOKLYN CENTER CONSERVATION COMMISSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. y ADOPTION OF ADVISORY COMMISSION BYLAWS There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to adopt the Advisory Commission Bylaws as submitted. The motion passed unanimously. y P ESTABLISHMENT OF TRAFFIC SAFETY APPEALS COMMITTEE The City Manager stated presently there are two committees which deal with traffic safety concerns, the Traffic Safety Advisory Commission (TSAC) and the Administrative Traffic Committee (ATC). He noted the ATC consists of City staff and was developed to respond to initial traffic complaints. He stated the ATC presently meets on a regular basis and the TSAC has not met since ince Februar Y, 1984. He noted the ATC has rocessed an annual average of 39 complaints, om laints g P , and few issues have been unsatisfactorily resolved by the ATC and have progressed to the City Council hearing process. He stated it is the staff's recommendation to dissolve the TSAC and, in its place, create an appeals committee. He noted this committee would meet only on an as- needed basis. Councilmember Lhotka stated he agrees with the staff recommendation to dissolve the TSAC. Councilmember Scott stated she believes it is beneficial to have a committee between the ATC and the Council. She noted most people are more comfortable dealing with a less formal group than the City Council. Councilmember Hawes stated he agrees with Councilmember Scott's statement. The City Manager stated staff will bring back a resolution reflecting the wishes of the Council. 6 -22 -87 -9- i TEMPORARY ON -SALE BEER LICENSE FOR THE BROOKLYN CENTER HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC BOOSTERS The City Manager stated the Brooklyn Center High School Athletic Boosters Association has applied for a temporary on -sale beer license for June 27 and 28, 1987. He noted the association is experiencing a problem getting a copy of their insurance certificate. He stated staff recommends approval of the license contingent upon receipt of the insurance certificate. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the temporary on -sale beer license for the Brooklyn Center High School Athletic Boosters contingent upon submittal of the insurance certificate. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:41 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 6 -22 -87 -10- - 7,1"kb MEMORANDUM TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planner DATE: July 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Performance Guarantees The following performance guarantees are recommended for release: 1. Four -unit building 6117 -23 Beard Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 85035 Amount of Guarantee - $2,500 money order Obligor - Lutterman Homes All site work for this project is now complete. I recommend total release of the performance guarantee. 2. River Road Dental Clinic 412 66th Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 85038 Amount of Guarantee - $4,500 Certificate of Deposit Obligor - Dr. Robert Schell All site improvements for this project are now complete. I recommend total release of the performance guarantee. Approve y Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota ( "City Council ") is considering the establishment of an Economic Development Authority ("EDA") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 458C, and by an enabling resolution substantially in the form of Exhibit A attached hereto; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 458C.05, requires that adoption of an enabling resolution creating an EDA be preceded by a public hearing and published notice of such hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center as follows: 1. The City Council shall hold a public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on August 24, 1987 to consider approval of an enabling resolution substantially in the form of Exhibit A creating an Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. The City Manager is authorized and directed to publish notice of the public hearing in the manner required by law. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. Exhibit A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTICN EIN?ABLING THE CREATION OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY IN THE CITY: BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1. Background: Findings 1.01. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 458C (Act) to establish an Economic Development Authority (EDA) to coordinate and administer economic development and redevelopment plans and programs of the City. 1.02. It is found and determined by the City Council that the encouragement and financial support of economic develop- ment in the City is vital to the orderly development and financ- ing of the City and in the best interests of the health, safety, prosperity and general welfare of the citizens of the City. 1.03. It is further found and determined that the economic development and redevelopment of the City can best be accomplished by the establishment of an EDA as authorized by the Act. 1.05. The City Council has in accordance with the Act conducted a public hearing on the establishment of an EDA at which all persons wishing to be heard expressed their views. Sec. 2. Enabling Authority 2.01. The Economic Development Authority of the City of Brooklyn Center (EDA) is established effective August 24, 1987. 2.02. The five members of the City Council shall serve as the commissioners of the EDA and the current members of the City Council are hereby appointed as commissioners. The EDA has the powers and duties given it by the Act and as limited by this resolution. 2.03. The following rules apply to the EDA and its operation. a) The EDA has and may exercise all of the powers conferred by law upon. a Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City. b) The EDA may not exercise any of the powers con - ferred upon the City by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A, the Municipal Development District Act. 2 c) The sale of bonds or other obligations of the EDA must be approved by the City Council. d) The EDA must follow the budget process for City departments in accordance with City policy, ordinance, resolution and the City charter. e) Development and redevelopment actions of the EDA must be in conformance with the City comprehensive plan and official controls implementing the comprehensive plan. f) The EDA must submit its plans for development and redevelopment to the City Council for approval in accordance with City planning procedures and law. 2.04. As provided in the Act it is the intention of the City Council that nothing in this resolution or any activities of the EDA are to be construed to impair the obligations of the City under any of its contracts or to affect in any detrimental manner the rights and privileges of a holder of a bond or other obliga- tion heretofore issued by the City. Sec. 3. Implementation 3.01. The City Council will from time to time and at the appropriate time adopt such ordinances and resolutions as are required and permitted by the Act to give full effect to the resolution. 3.02. The Mayor, City Manager, Clerk, Finance Director and Attorney of the City are authorized and directed to take the actions and execute and deliver the documents necessary to give full effect to this resolution. Date Mayor Attest: Clerk 0007ex0l.c41 3 ge (ARTAG) Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT FROM THE SCALE FLYERS OF MINNESOTA AND THE GRASSFIELD R/C CLUB, INC. -------------------------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, THE SCALE FLYERS OF MINNESOTA AND THE GRASSFIELD R/C CLUB, INC. have presented the City with a gift of one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) and have designated that it be used for the purchase of a folding table top lecturn and microphone accessories for the Social Center in the Community Center; and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends the donors for their civic efforts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $150 be appropriated to the General Fund Community Center Recreation Budget (01 -4552- 387 -66) to purchase one folding table top lectern and microphone accessories. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF KENNETH SMITH WHEREAS, Kenneth Smith has served the City of Brooklyn Center as an employee since December 4, 1967; and 1987; and WHEREAS, he is retiring from public service on June 30, WHEREAS, his devotion to the tasks and responsibilities as Dispatcher contributed substantially to the efficiency and level -of- service of the City; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Kenneth Smith is recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center and that the City wishes him a long and happy retirement. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. i Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1987 -F (MUNICIPAL SERVICE GARAGE HEATING, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1987 -07) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1987 -F signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Hovde Plumbing & Heating, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contact: Municipal Service Garage Heating Improvement Project No. 1987 -07 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $7,230.00 $7,230.00 2. The value of work performed is the same as the original contract. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $7,230.00. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. Member introduced the following resolution and yz—� moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -12, CONTRACT 1987 -K (DALLAS ROAD REPAIR BETWEEN 72ND AND 73RD AVENUE NORTH) WHEREAS, Resolution No. 86 -158 established the procedures for correcting deficiencies in Dallas Road between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North; and WHEREAS, Phase I and II of the corrections have been completed; and WHEREAS, plans and specifications have been prepared in accordance with Phase III requirements: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The plans and specifications for the following improvement, as prepared by the City Engineer, are approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk: DALLAS ROAD REPAIR BETWEEN 72ND AND 73RD AVENUES NORTH IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -12, CONTRACT 1987 -K 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published as required by law, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until the date and time specified, at which time they will be publicly opened at City Hall by the City Clerk and the City Engineer. Subsequently, the bids shall be tabulated and will then be considered by the City Council at a meeting of the City Council. The advertisement shall state that 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 for 5 percent of the total amount of such bid. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 13 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: Dallas Road Repair Between 72nd Avenue and 73rd Avenue North Improvement Project 1987 -12 Contract 1987 -K On September 22, 1986, City Council approved Resolution No. 86 -158 A resolution that outlined the stage repair of Dallas Road between 72nd Avenue North and 73rd Avenue North. A copy of that resolution and a copy of the report with the resolution are attached. At this point Phase I repairs are complete. Phase I repairs consisted of subcutting the weakest soils and replacing them with Class 5 Aggregate and a heavier bituminous mat. The Phase II non - destructive testing with a Road Dater was not performed because of climatic conditions. In its place a supplemental evaluation was made by Soil Testing Services, Inc., (STS). STS evaluated proposed permanent repair alternatives and reviewed the design assumptions. Final recommendations made by STS include the following: 1. All driveway aprons reconstructed by subcutting 1.5 feet and replacing that material with nu drainage. ra lar for better subsurface g 2. Installation of edge drains approximately 5 -1/2 to 6 foot deep. 3. Milling or removing a section of pavement adjacent to the curb for a transition to the overlay. July 9, 1987 Page 2 4. A 1 -1/2 inch overlay of the southerly section and a 2 -1/2 inch overlay of the northerly section. The project should take approximately 20 working days because much of the work can be'done concurrently. These repairs will result in 9 -ton design road with a 20 year design life. It is therefore recommended that the attached resolution approving plans and ordering advertisement for bid, Improvement Project No. 1985 -12, Contract 1987 -K, Dallas Road Repair, between 72nd and 73rd Avenue North be approved. Respectful �i submitted, App oved for submittal, V t' U u I , H.i Spurr er Sy Kn�pp City Engineer Director of Public Works HRS /ri - I Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 86 -158 RESOLUTION APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT 1985 -K AND PROCEDURES FOR CORRECTION OF PROJECT DEFICIENCIES DALLAS ROAD BETWEEN 72ND AND 73RD AVENUES NORTH) WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reported to the City Council that substantial deficiencies exist on the newly reconstructed Dallas Road between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North (Project No. 1985 -12, Contract 1985 -K) and has recommended the following 3 phase program: Phase Description Estimated Cost I Repair or replacement of currently $ 14,500 deteriorated sections II Monitoring and testing $ 1,500 III Reconstruction 42,000 Estimated Total Project Cost $ 58,000 AND, WHEREAS, special assessments have already been levied to abutting properties for the benefits derived from the street reconstruction: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The 3 phase procedure for correction of deficiencies as recommended by the Director of Public Works is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into Supplemental Agreement with Hardrives, Inc., the. contractor for Contract 1985 -K, providing for completion of the work described in Phase I at an estimated cost of $12,000 less an estimated credit of $2,500 for defective work by the contractor. 3. The Director of Public Works is hereby authorized and directed to conduct the monitoring and testing program described in Phase II. 4. Upon completion of the monitoring and testing program the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized and . Y directe d to . ecifica prepare plans and specifications tions for the completion of the project under Phase III, and shall submit said plans and specifications to the City Council for approval. 5. Funding for all work contemplated herein is hereby allocated from the Municipal State Aid Fund Balance Account No. 2611. T RESOLUTION NO. 86 -158 September 22, 1986 Date Ma}� �^ ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. x CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF �T ® ®�1�I BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: September 18, 1986 RE: Dallas Road Between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North In February, 1986 our department became aware of problems with newly constructed (in 1985) Dallas Road between 72nd and 73rd Avenues North. Inspection of the project showed that frost heave was displacing several newly constructed driveway aprons on Dallas Road. Then, in early Spring of 1986, the roadway surface also began to show signs of distress and failure. At that time we employed STS Consultants, Ltd. (an independent consulting geotechnical engineering firm) to conduct a program of testing nd evaluation to determine ermine the cause of the frost heave, the cause of pavement distress and failure, and to recommend what steps should be taken to assure that the street will have a 20 year (minimum) design life. STS prepared an evaluation of the pavement and driveway distress and failure areas. Their report indicates: (1) that the frost heave of the pavement and of the driveways is caused by the freeze -up of the underdrain system which was installed (to a depth of 2 1/2 to 4 feet) as a part of the 1985 project; (2) that the pavement structure is inadequate for the type of subgrade soils which exist in this location; and (3) that there are several areas (primarily those areas which have already shown signs of failure) where construction did not comply with the plans and specifications. Numerous alternative remedies ranging in cost from $25,000 to over $100,000 have been considered. onsidered. Following detailed evaluation of those alternatives we now recommend the following three phase plan: Phase I All of the currently distressed and damaged pavement areas would e b removed the subgrade would be corrected and the pavement would be replaced. This phase would be accomplished during the next 2 to 4 weeks. Phase II The entire pavement (both the repaired sections and the currently non - deteriorated sections) and all driveways would be monitored during the winter and spring of 1986 -87. In spring of 1987 the roadway would be tested with the use of a RoadRater. (The RoadRater is a machine which is designed to analyze the structural capacity of an inplace roadway. Note: When a street is in an area which has a high groundwater table the RoadRater must be used in the spring September 18, 1986 Page 2 of the ear when the y groundwater table is at its highest so as to test the road when it is most susceptible to damage.) Use of the RoadRater will tell us whether additional subgrade problems exist and whether any additional repair or replacement of the pavement is necessary. Phase III Upon final evaluation of the monitoring and testing program we will develop a repair project consisting of the following elements: 1. Install a new subdrain system at a depth of approximately 5 to 6 1/2 feet (depth will depend on conflicts with other utility lines). 2. Repair or replace driveways which have been damaged by frost heave. 3. Repair or replace additional pavement areas which have been identified as needing repair by use of the RoadRater. 4. Finally, a complete bituminous overlay would be placed to provide the additional structure needed to assure capacity of the roadway. It is proposed that Phase III be completed in early summer of 1987. COST ESTIMATE Following is our cost estimate for completion of the work as described above: Phase I Estimated Total Construction Cost = $12,000 Engineering Services by STS to Date = 5.000 Subtotal $17,000 Less Charge to Hardrives, Inc. for Defective Work = -2.500 Subtotal, City Cost for Phase I = $14,500 Phase II Rental of RoadRater and Engineering Analyses = $1,500 Phase III Estimated Contract Cost = $40,000 Engineering Cost (additional analyses by STS) = 2.000 Subtotal, City Cost for Phase III = $42,000 Total estimated project cost to City $58,000 September 18, 1986 Page 3 CONCLUSION It is my opinion that, while this proposal does not fully comply with MNDOT established design standards (implementation of those standards would cost well over $100,000), the recommended procedure will result in a roadway which will have a 20 year (plus) life expectancy with few, if any, problems. Attached hereto for consideration by the City Council is a resolution which would approve a supplemental agreement with Hardrives, Inc. (the contractor for the 1985 project) to complete Phase I. The resolution would also direct our office to conduct Phase II investigations, and to prepare plans and specifications for Phase III. Finally, the resolution provides that funding for all of this work be allocated from the Local Municipal State Aid Street Fund. If this resolution is adopted we will proceed with Phases I and II, then submit plans and specifications for Phase III, along with an updated cost estimate to the City Council for approval in late spring of 1987. Because of the costs involved we recommend that Phase III work be placed under a new contract rather than to do the work under supplemental agreement with Hardrives, Inc. INFORMATION TO PROPERTY OWNERS If this recommendation is approved we will send a letter to each of the property owners on this block advising them of our proposed repair program and also advising them that the work would be done at no additional cost to them. Respectfully submitted, Sy &app Director of Public Works SK: jy - t. CD t . j z 4 s LLt J I 0 Lij � s H � . 72ND AVE N I i DALLAS RD. & SURROUNDING AREA t 0 13'3 266 1 N S SCALE EE' CUTER aL ?Ar,CD BY UL T !MAP i SHE~ T rt OF I d Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1987 -G (1987 SEALCOATING PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1987 -09) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1987 -09, a bid was received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 9th day of July, 1987. Said bid was as follows: Bidder Bid Amount Allied Blacktop Company $ 100,116.31 WHEREAS, it appears that Allied Blacktop Company of Maple Grove, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $100,116.31 with Allied Blacktop Company of Maple Grove, Minnesota in the name me of the City f Brooklyn lyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1987 -09 according o the g plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1987 -09 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved pp As Bid Contract $ 100,116.31 Engineering 3,500.00 Administration 400.00 Legal 0.00 $ 117,600 $ 104,016.31 2. The estimated costs will be financed in Division 42. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. g� Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1987 -G (1987 SEALCOATING PROGRAM, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1987 -09) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1987 -09, a bid was received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 9th day of July, 1987. Said bid was as follows: Bidder Bid Amount Allied Blacktop Company $ 100,116.31 WHEREAS, it appears that Allied Blacktop Company of Maple Grove, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder; and WHEREAS, the bid was under the estimate for the project and it is desireable to add additional work: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1, The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $100,116.31 with Allied Blacktop Company of Maple Grove, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1987 -09 according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2, The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1987 -09 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved As Bid Contract $ 100,116.31 Engineering 3,500.00 Administration 400,00 Legal 0.00 $ 117,600 $ 104,016,31 2. The estimated costs will be financed in Division 42. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 BROOKLYN TELEPHONE 561 -5440 CENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: 1987 Sealcoating Program Improvement Project No. 1987 -09 Contract No. 1987 -G The City received bids for the 1987 Sealcoating Program on July 9, 1987. The low bidder was Allied Blacktop Company. While there was only one bid, the bid was below the Engineer's estimate and is considered reasonable. The low bidder was the successful contractor for the 1986 program. We want to see if additional mileage can be added if the addition does not alter the base bid prices. The final recommendation will be furnished for the Council on Monday evening. Re ctfu submitted, Ap rove for submittal, rrier P Sy ,nape City En 'neer Director of Public Wdrk HRS /nl U 9 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1987 -J (EAST PALMER LAKE TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1987 -12) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1987 -12, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 9th day of July, 1987. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Amount Ideal Paving, Inc. $ 44,690.00 H.L. Johnson Company 44,733.40 Alber Construction 46,979.00 Barber Construction 52,007.10 Hardrives, Inc. 68,740.60 Valley Paving 68,743.60 WHEREAS, it appears that Ideal Paving, Inc. of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $44,690.00 with Ideal Paving, Inc. of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1987 -12 according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1987 -12 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Bid Contract $ 44,690 Engineering (9 %) 4,022 Administration 447 $ 49,159 2. The estimated costs shall be financed in Division 53 of the Capital Projects Fund. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF I:BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE C ENTER 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: East Palmer Lake Trail Improvement Project No. 1987 -12, Contract 1987 -J The City received bids for the East Palmer Lake Trail Improvement on July 9, 1987. The low bidder was Ideal Paving, Inc. We will review the qualifications of the low bidder and make a final recommendation of award on Monday, July 13, 1987. W ur bmitted, Approved for submittal, Sy nape Direc tor of Public Wor` HRS /nl L� M Fh Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST07/12/87) WHEREAS, a Notice to Abate Nuisance and Diseased Shade Tree Removal Agreement has been issued to the owners of certain properties in the City of Brooklyn Center giving the owners twenty (20) days to remove diseased shade trees on the owners' property; and WHEREAS, the City can expedite the removal of diseased shade trees by declaring diseased shade trees a public nuisance: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The diseased shade trees at the following addresses are hereby declared to be a public nuisance. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER WILLIAM F BETHKE 5842 XERXES AVENUE N 100 ROBERT & MARY PIXLEY 3401 72ND AVENUE NO 101 STEVEN & J ERICKSON 3412 72ND AVENUE NO 102 STEPHEN RANNALLO 3812 WOODBINE LANE 103 JERALD SANDBERG 3413 WOODBINE LANE 104 ROBERT J ZERBAN 3406 WOODBINE LANE 105 CHAS J HEYWOOD 6931 DREW AVENUE NO 106 MARK & C. HERRMAN 6936 DREW AVENUE NO 107 RICHARD 0 LUND 7012 DREW AVENUE NO 108 FLOYD C WATSON 1705 73RD AVENUE NO 109 EDWARD M TABARA 5325 CAMDEN AVENUE N 110 SHEILA J WARD 5741 BRYANT AVENUE N 111 CHESTER & MARY HALEY 5306 BRYANT AVENUE N 112 COLLEEEN G KOPET 806 53RD AVENUE N 113 COLLEEN G KOPET 806 53RD AVENUE N 114 RALPH C JOHNSON 5540 BRYANT AVENUE N 115 JEFFREY & S. MARTIN 5630 ALDRICH AVE N 116 ROBERT G MCLEAN 421 69TH AVENUE N 117 GRACE LAMUSGA 6720 WILLOW LANE N 118 BRKLYN CTR METH CH 7200 7200 BRKLYN BLV 119 WILLOW LANE REALTY 7015 BROOKLYN BLVD 120 CHARLES THOMPSON 6101 BRKLYN BLVD 121 SANDRA V IVERSON 6800 REGENT AVE N 122 ESTHER J PURDHAM 6824 REGENT AVE N 123 RAYMOND SWANSON 6843 REGENT AVE N 124 CHARLES & D. SCHLICK 6727 PERRY AVE N 125 RODNEY J ROYALTY 6800 PERRY AVE N 126 RICHARD J CZECH 5312 68TH AVENUE N 127 ROGER L FORSLUND 7218 MAJOR AVENUE N 128 LELAND P BANNISTER 7119 MAJOR AVENUE N 129 STEVEN J BALTES 5228 EWING AVENUE N 130 STEVEN J BALTES 5228 EWING AVENUE N 131 RESOLUTION NO. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER SABER & MARY SHIPP 5321 FREMONT AVE N 132 HELEN NYLANDER 5524 GIRARD AVENUE N 133 ABED & K WAZWAZ 6318 UNITY AVE N 134 ALMA TIMMERSMAN 5318 ELEANOR LANE 135 KENNETH J GREGORNIK 4600 WINCHESTER LA 136 WAYNE & G. FINLEY 5454 COLFAX AVENUE N 137 ROBERT & J MCGUIRE 1108 57TH AVENUE NO 138 STEVEN & C BALTES 5228 EWING AVE N 139 GARY /DANAE MORRISON 5104 TWIN LAKE BLVD 140 WM J EIDEN 5104 TWIN LK BLVD E 141 WM J EIDEN 5438 EAST TWN LK BLV 142 a THEO DAUFELT 5517 EAST TWN LK BLV 143 EARLE BR FARM TOWNH 0000 YORK PLACE 154 DONALD A THOMPSON 3812 57TH AVENUE NO 159 DONALD E RUUD 6418 UNITY AVE N 160 ROBERT K OHNSTAD 5201 WINCHESTER LA 161 RODNEY G MATTINEN 5948 VINCENT AVE N 162 GERALD L BASSETT 6006 CAMDEN AVE N 163 ROGER LEE FEHLBERG 4512 WOODBINE LANE 54 JERALD & L. BLAMEY 7136 WILLOW LANE NO 55 ROGER & MARY BRANDT 7120 RIVERDALE ROAD 56 ROGER & MARY BRANDT 7120 RIVERDALE ROAD 57 RONALD L ANDERSON 7207 RIVERDALE ROAD 58 RONALD L ANDERSON 7207 RIVERDALE ROAD 59 RONALD L ANDERSON 7207 RIVERDALE ROAD 60 STEVE R BIRCHER 5331 63RD AVENUE NO 61 ANNE C WASHINGTON 5738 HUMBOLDT AVE NO 62 JOHN HERMERDING 5743 EMERSON AVE NO 63 RAYMOND C MATTHYS 5931 XERXES AVE NO 64 STEVEN W JOHNSON 3321 59TH AVENUE NO 65 MATT & M. STAR 3301 59TH AVENUE NO 66 RAY & D. PETERSON 5842 ABBOTT AVE NO 67 JOHN & CINDY POPPEN 6337 HALIFAX DRIVE 68 LAWRENCE J KRAUS 5947 BRYANT AVE N 71 ARNOLD J PLOOF 5918 ZENITH AVE N 72 FRED J DOBESH 6007 ABBOTT AVE NO 73 WILLIAM & M. CHAPMAN 3212 O'HENRY ROAD 74 BEATA L WILLIAMS 7025 GRIMES AVE N 75 HANLEY F PESTA 7213 GRIMES AVE N 76 SCOTT /BONNIE VITTUM 5201 HOWE LANE 77 SYRUM H NESS 6419 UNITY AVENUE N 78 MARIE MCCABE 6407 UNITY AVENUE N 79 WILLIAM J BRUNEAU 6325 UNITY AVENUE N 80 DOUG / CONNIE SCHUUR 2336 BROOKVIEW DRIVE 81 BETSY J LANG 2300 ERICON DRIVE 82 CARL L PETTY 3318 50TH AVENUE NO 83 FRED R CAMERON 3321 50TH AVENUE NO 84 CARIN LEE RUDOLPH 5318 QUEENE AVE NO. 85 SUZANNE HAVEK 5731 NORTHPORT DRIVE 86 RONALD T JOHNS 5806 DREW AVENUE NO 87 FRANK P MABEN 5807 DREW AVENUE NO 88 JAMES & A. BABEKUHL 5901 EWING AVENUE NO 89 MICHAEL & S BRADLEY 6525 PERRY AVENUE NO 90 RESOLUTION NO. PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY ADDRESS TREE NUMBER JOHN & DIANA HOOK 5113 ELEANOR DRIVE 91 DONALD G GRIMES 5322 IRVING AVENUE N 92 JOHN P LUNZER 5838 CAMDEN AVENUE N 94 THOMAS G VINCENT 5807 JAMES AVENUE N 95 JANET C CHAPMAN 5930 JUNE AVENUE NO 96 LYLE F BUCKERIDGE 5718 DREW AVENUE NO 97 ELWOOD F WAGNER 2700 65TH AVENUE NO 98 MARILYN E KANE 2712 65TH AVENUE NO 99 DAVID & CYNTHIA MARSH 5312 HOWE LANE STUMP 2. After twenty (20) days from the date of the notice, the property owners will receive a second written notice that will give them (5) business days in which to contest the determination of City Council by requesting a hearing in writing. Said request shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. After five (5) days, if the property owner fails to request a hearing, the tree(s) shall be removed by the City. 4. All removal costs, including legal, financing and administrative charges, shall be specially assessed against the property. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator DATE: July 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Dissolution of Traffic Safety Advisory isory Committee and Establishment of Traffic Appeals Committee Attached is a resolution dissolving the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) and establishing a Traffic Appeals Committee (TAC), as directed by the City Council at its June 22 1987 meeting. Please let me know if you need additional information regarding this item. c F/ Member introduced the following • resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DISSOLVING THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY COUNCIL'S TRAFFIC SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND ESTABLISHING A TRAFFIC APPEALS COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council established the Brooklyn Center Traffic Safety Advisory Committee on February 11, 1980; and WHEREAS, the City's Administrative Traffic Committee, comprised of the City Manager, Director of Public Works, and Chief of Police, actively respond to initial citizen, staff, and City Council traffic complaints and concerns; and WHEREAS, the efficiency of the Administrative Traffic Committee in handling complaints has resulted in few appeals to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee has not convened since February 9, 1984, due to the Administrative Traffic Committee's ability to handle traffic complaints and concerns; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to dissolve the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee and establish a Traffic Appeals Committee to respond to appeals made to the Administrative Traffic Committee; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Appeals Committee will consist of three members appointed by the Mayor and City Council and serving three -year staggered terms; members must be residents of Brooklyn Center for at least one year prior to appointment and two of the three members at any one time must have knowledge of general traffic practices; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Appeals Committee will meet on an as- needed basis only. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City Council that the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee is hereby dissolved and relinquished of its duties and responsibilities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City Council that the Traffic Appeals Committee is hereby established with duties and responsibilities as outlined herein. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the followin g voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECITING A PROPOSAL FOR A FINANCING PROGRAM FOR A MULTIFAMILY RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT (THE "PROJECT "), GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO THE PROJECT AND THE FINANCING PROGRAM PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE FINANCING PROGRAM FOR APPROVAL TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT AND FINANCING PROGRAM (MARANATHA HOUSING PROJECT) WHEREAS, (a) Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act ") confers upon cities, or housing and redevelopment authorities or port authorities authorized by ordinance to exercise on behalf of a city the powers conferred by the Act, the power to issue revenue bonds to finance a program for the purposes of planning, administering, making or purchasing loans with respect to one or more multifamily housing developments within the boundaries of the city; (b) The City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the "City ") adopted its Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C Housing Plan (the "Housing Plan ") on or about September 20, 1982, after holding a public hearing thereon, all in accordance with the requirements of the Act; and such Housing Plan was amended by the City on or about November 22, 1982; (c) The Housing Plan provides a general description of programs to be implemented to meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Plan, including financing programs to provide affordable RESOLUTION NO. housing to elderly persons and persons of low and moderate income; (d) The City has received from Maranatha Ministeries Foundation, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the "Developer "), a proposal that the City undertake a program to finance a multifamily housing development (the "Project ") hereinafter described, through the issuance of revenue bonds or obligations (the "Bonds ") pursuant to the Act; (e) The City desires to: facilitate the development of rental housing within the community; encourage the development of affordable housing opportunities for residents of the City; encourage the development of housing facilities designed for occupancy by persons of low or moderate income; encourage the development of housing facilities designed for occupancy primarily by elderly persons; and encourage the development of blighted or underutilized land and structures within the boundaries of the City; and the Project will assist the City in achieving these objectives. (f) The Developer is currently engaged in owning and operating a nursing home facility (the Maranatha Baptist Nursing Home) located in the City. The Project to be financed by the Bonds consists of the construction and equipping of a multifamily rental housing development of approximately 64 rental units on land adjoining the existing Maranatha Baptist Nursing Home located at approximately 5401 69th Avenue North in the City, and consequently consists of the construction of buildings which will result in the provision of additional rental housing opportunities to persons within the community; (g) The City has been advised by representatives of the Developer that con- ventional, commercial financing to pay the capital costs of the Project is available 2 RESOLUTION NO. only on a limited basis and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of operating the Project would be significantly reduced, but the Developer has also advised the City that with the aid of municipal financing, and resulting low borrowing costs, the Project is economically more feasible; (h) A public hearing on the Project and the financing program therefor was held on July 13, 1987, after notice was published, all as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.05, subd. 5, at which public hearing all those appearing at said hearing who desired to speak were heard and written comments, if any, were considered; Y , (i) The City submitted the financing program for the Project to the metropolitan council or the regional development commission for the area in which the city is located, and such reviewing agency was given the opportunity to comment thereon all as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.04, subd. 2; (j) No public official of the City has either a direct or indirect financial interest in the Project nor will any public official either directly or indirectly benefit financially from the Project; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City hereby gives preliminary approval to the proposal of the Developer that the City undertake the Project, described above, and the program of financing therefor, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, consisting of the financing of a multifamily rental housing development within the City pursuant to the Developer's specifications and to a revenue agreement between the City and the Developer (or a separate, wholly -owned nonprofit subsidiary of the Developer) on such terms and conditions with provisions for revision from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenues sufficient to pay, when due, the principal and interest on the Bonds in a total principal 3 RESOLUTION NO. amount not to exceed $4,500,000 to be issued pursuant to the Act to finance the Project; and said agreement or agreements may also provide for the entire interest of the Developer (or separate, wholly -owned nonprofit subsidiary of the Developer) therein to be mortgaged to the purchasers of the Bonds, or a trustee for the holder(s) of the Bonds, and other security instruments to the purchasers of the Bonds or to the trustee for the holder(s) of the Bonds; and the City hereby undertakes preliminarily to issue its revenue bonds in accordance with such terms and conditions; 2. At the option of the City, the financing may be structured so as to take advantage of whatever means are available and are permitted by law to enhance the security for, or marketability of, the Bonds; rovided that an such P Y financing structure must be consented to b the Developer. er. P 3. On the basis of information available to the City, it appears, and the City hereby finds, that the Project constitutes a multifamily housing development within the meaning of Section 462C.05 of the Act; that the Project will be designed for rental primarily to the elderly; the availability of the financing under the Act and the willingness of the City to furnish such financing will be a substantial inducement to the Developer (or separate, wholly - owned nonprofit subsidiary of the Developer) to undertake the • Project, and that the effect of the Project, if undertaken, will be to encourage the provision of additional multifamily rental housing opportunities to residents of the City, to assist in the redevelopment of blighted and marginal land and to promote more intensive development and use of land within the City; 4. The Project, and the program to finance the Project by the issuance of revenue bonds, is hereby given preliminary approval by the City subject to the approval of the financing program by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency ( "MHFA ") and subject to final approval by the City, the Developer and the P purchasers of the Bonds as to the ultimate details of the financing of the project; 5. In accordance with subdivision 5 of Section 462C.05, Minnesota Statutes, the Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to submit the program for financing the Project to MHFA, requesting its approval, and other officers, and employees and agents of the City and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City are hereby authorized to provide MHFA with preliminary information as it may require; • 4 RESOLUTION NO. 6. The Developer has agreed and it is hereby P 9 y determined that any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the financing of the Project whether or not the project is carried to completion and whether or not approved by MHFA will be paid by the Developer (or separate, wholly -owned nonprofit subsidiary of the Developer); 7. Briggs and Morgan, Professional Association, acting as bond counsel, and such investment bankers as may be selected by the City with the consent of the Developer, are authorized to assist in the preparation and review of necessary documents relating to the Project and the financing program therefor, to consult with the City Attorney, Developer and purchasers of the Bonds (or trustee for the purchasers of the Bonds) as to the series, maturities, interest rates, security and other terms and provisions of the Bonds and as to the covenants and other provisions of the necessary documents and submit such documents to the City for final approval; 8. Nothing in this Resolution or the documents prepared pursuant hereto shall authorize the expenditure of any municipal funds on the Project other than the revenues derived from the Project or otherwise granted to the City for this purpose. The Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property or funds of the City except the revenues and proceeds pledged to P P P 9 the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. The holder(s) of the Bonds shall never have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the outstanding principal on the Bonds or the interest thereon, or to enforce payment thereon against any property of the City. The Bonds shall recite in substance that the Bonds, including the interest thereon, are payable solely from the revenues and proceeds pledged to the payment thereof. The Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation. 9. In anticipation of the approval by MHFA and the issuance of the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the Project, and in order that completion of the project will not be unduly delayed when approved, the Developer (or separate, wholly -owned nonprofit subsidiary of the Developer) is hereby authorized to make such expenditures and advances toward payment of that portion of the costs of the Project to be financed from the proceeds of the Bonds, as the Developer (or separate, wholly -owned nonprofit subsidiary of the 5 RESOLUTION 110. Developer) considers necessary, including the use of interim, short -term financing, subject to reimbursement from the proceeds of the Bonds if any when delivered but otherwise without liability on the part of the City. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager P Y g r FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator DATE: July 9, 1987 SUBJECT: Personnel Ordinance Amendment At the July 13, 1987, City Council meeting, the Council will consider for a second reading an ordinance amending chapter 17 regarding personnel. There was some discussion during the first reading about the section on accrual of sick leave. After review, staff has agreed the proposed language does not fit the intended outcome of allowing the City Manager to grant a bank of sick leave to new employees. The second reading f the ordinance i g will not include the e lan ua g g on banking sick leave; staff will prepare an ordinance amendment on this for consideration at a future Council meeting. The second reading will include all other i amendments presented at the first reading. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1987, at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 17 regarding Personnel. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 REGARDING PERSONNEL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 17 -111 VACATION LEAVE. 1. Amount. Permanent employees shall earn vacation leave at the rate of [five- sixths of one working day] 6.67 hours for each calendar month of full -time service or major fraction thereof. Permanent employees with five consecutive years of service through ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation leave at the rate of [fifteen working days] 120 hours per year. [(1 - 1/4 days per month.)] Permanent employees with more than ten consecutive years of service shall earn vacation leave according to the following schedule: During 11th year of service 16 work" _ 1 3 days /mo.)] 128 hours per year g y [ in days per year 1 g Y P Y ( / During 12th year of service [17 working days per year (1 - 5/12 days /mo.)] 136 hours per year During 13th year of service [18 working days per year (1 - 1/2 days /mo.)] 144 hours per year During 14th year of service [19 working days per year (1 - 7/12 days /mo.)] 152 hours per year During 15th year of service [20 working days per year (1 - 2/3 days /mo.)] 160 hours per year Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional vacation leave. ORDINANCE 110. 3. Accrual. Employees with less than five years of service may accrue a maximum of [fifteen working days] 120 hours vacation leave. Employees with five to fifteen consecutive years of service may accrue a maximum of [twenty working days] 160 hours vacation leave. Employees with fifteen consecutive years or more of service may accrue a maximum of [twenty -five working days] 200 hours vacation leave. Accruals in excess of the established maximums may be granted by the City Manager in the best interests of the City. Section 17 -112 SICK LEAVE 1. Eligibility. Sick leave with pay shall be granted to probationary and permanent employees at the rate of [one working day] eight hours for each calendar month of full -time service or major fraction thereof. 3. Accrual. Sick leave shall accrue at the rate of [one day] eight hours per month until [120 days] 960 hours have been accumulated and at the rate of [one -half day] four hours per month after [ 120 days] 960 hours have been accumulated. Employees using earned vacation leave or sick leave shall be considered to be working for the purpose of accumulating additional sick leave. Workers' Compensation benefits shall be credited against the compensation due employees during sick leave. Section 17 -115 LEAVES OF ABSENCE 1. Leaves of absence without pay may be granted by the City Manager where the best interests of the City will not be harmed. Such leaves shall not exceed periods of ninety calendar days unless based on disability or other good reasons. Vacation and sick leave benefits shall not accrue during periods of leaves of absence without pay. If the leave of absence is granted for medical reasons, the City Manager may authorize the continuance of the City's monthly contribution for the employee's health dental and basic life insurance premiums during the leave of= absence 2. Employees are obligated to return to work on the first work day following the period of approved leave unless prior approval for an extension of the leave has been granted by the City Manager. 3. Employees on leave must keep their immediate supervisor informed of any change in their current address [2.] 4. Employees summoned for jury duty or subpoenaed to testify in court on behalf of the Employer or for reasons growing out of City employment shall receive an amount of compensation which will equal the difference between the employee's regular pay and jury duty or witness fee compensation received. ORDINANCE NO. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1987. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) 10b CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of at P.M. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Vacating Part of the right of way of Logan Avenue North along Lot 6, Block 2, Northbrook Center Addition. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG THE EASTERLY LOT LINE OF LOT 4 BLOCK 1 EARLE BROWN 1ST ADDITION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The ten foot utility and drainage easement along the east line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown lst Addition Hennepin County Minnesota except the northerly 10 feet the southerly 5 feet and easterly 5 feet of said easement is hereby vacated. Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 BROOKLYN TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: Easement Vacation Lot 4, Block 1 Earle Brown First Addition Mr. John DeVries, 2813 - 66th Avenue North, has requested the utility and drainage easement, along the east line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown First Addition, be vacated. We have reviewed Mr. DeVries' request. We have advised utility companies that this request has been made and asked if the easement was necessary to construct, maintain, or access any of their existing or proposed facilities. We have reviewed the City's need to use this easement and have concluded there is no reason to keep the westerly 5 feet of the easement. The easterly 5 feet of the easement is in the setback area and could possibly by utilized for sideyard garding and, therefore, it would be appropriate to keep that part of the easement. It is our recommendation that the attached ordinance be processed. This ordinance vacates the westerly 5 feet of the 10 foot utility and drainage easement on the east line of Lot 4, Block 1, Earle Brown First Addition. Re pectf lly submitted, Ap roved for submittal, H.R. Spurrier Sy �L� City Engineer Director of Public Works HRS/ ""' 19661LL/,NFRIU CTf =~ 66T H. AVE N 38.81 I � o 10 I � I LOT 4 �� � I 1 I I i I � V IA . r co BLOCK 1 I 10 I 75 - -------- 7s E I I I I 16 IS 14 EASEMENT VACATION LOT 4, BLOCK 1 EARLE BROWN 1st ADDITION 0 30 60 SCALE IN FEE-r ` AP,~`?AP „D BY ULTIMAP { i I SHEET 2 OF 2 66TH. AVE. N. ui z 65TH. AVE. Q Ln w X 64TH. AVE. N. X EARLE BROWN 1st ADDITION VICINITY 0 200 400 SCALE IN FEET C�CI��CI� PREPARED BY ULTIMAP SHEET 1 OF 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator r� DATE: July 8, 1987 SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Zoning The attached ordinance amendment makes housekeeping changes to the zoning ordinance on comprehensive planning. As you may recall, the City Council recently amended Chapter 35 by deleting from the ordinance duties and responsibilities of the Planning Commission and enumerating such duties and responsibilities in Resolution Nos. 87 -87 and 87 -134. In making the ordinance amendment, section 35 -202 was given the same name as section 35- 200 - -that of Comprehensive Planning. To remedy this problem, section 35 -200 has been incorporated into section 35 -202. Also, to add clarification, the word "Planning" has been inserted before the word "Commission" each time it appears in this section. /Oe CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , 1987, at p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to Chapter 35 regarding Zoning. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ZONING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: [ Section 35 -200 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. The City Council hereby undertakes to carry on comprehensive study and planning as a continuing guide for land use and development legislation within the municipality. For this purpose the City Council has adopted, by Resolution No. 82 -255, a Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center, and designates an advisory planning agency by Section 35 -201 to aid in such planning.] Section 35 -202. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING 1. Comprehensive Planning. The City Council hereby undertakes to carry on comprehensive study and planning as a continuing guide for land use and development legislation within the municipality. For this purpose the City Council has adopted by Resolution No 82 -255 a Comprehensive Guide Plan for the City of Brooklyn Center, and designates an advisory planning agency by Section 35-201 to aid in such Planning. The Planning Commission shall, from time to time, upon its own motion or upon direction of the City Council, review the Comprehensive Plan and by a majority vote of all members of the Planning Commission recommend appropriate amendments to the City Council. Before recommending any such amendments to the City Council, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing to consider the proposed amendment. The Secretary to the Planning Commission shall publish notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing once in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten (10) days before the date of the hearing. Furthermore, the Secretary shall transmit copies of the proposed amendment to the City Council prior to the publication of the notice of hearing. Following the review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, the City Council shall consider the proposed amendment and may, by resolution of two - thirds of its members, amend the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Coordination with Other Agencies. cies. In the erfo p rmance of its planning activities, the Planning Commission shall consult with and coordinate the P lannin g activities of other departments p ents and agencies of the municipality to insure conformity with and to assist in a development of the comprehensive save munic' P i al plan. Furthermore the Plannin P P z Commission shall take due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government and other affected public agencies. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1987. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) • MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter FROM: Jim Lindsay DATE: July 7, 1987 SUBJECT: Deletion of Chapter 23, Sections 701 -709 of the City Ordinances Chapter 23, Sections 701 -709, of the City Ordinances deal with the appointment of Special Police Officers. Since the establishment of the Minnesota Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Board and the implementation of the required licensing of police officers, the appointment of Special Police Officers is not feasible. Any individual appointed as a police officer must have an active POST license. The possibility of obtaining such an individual for a temporary assignment is very unlikely. Consequently, we have not used this ordinance and do not ever intend to use it. Therefore, I request deletion of these sections of the City Ordinances. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 10d Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the ____day of___________________, 1987 at________ d __ __.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider the eletion of an ordinance no longer used. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE N0._____________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER R 3 REGARDING APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances is hereby amended by the repeal of the following: [APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS] [Section 23 -701. APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS. Whenever, in the judgment of the City ouncil of the Ci of Brook Y Y n Y Center, it shall be necessary or desirable to increase the police force of the City temporarily, the City Council is empowered to appoint Special Police Officers The appointment shall designate the time for which the services are to be rendered and the place. The person appointed shall accept such appointment in writing and shall take an oath of office to be filed with the clerk. Any such appointment may be revoked with or without cause and without notice by the City Council at any time.] [Section 23 -702. AUTHORITY OF SPECIAL POLICE OFFICERS. Persons appointed special police officers have authority to serve, process and make arrests and do all acts authorized by law to preserve the public peace and order that other policemen in the City have and their duties and obligations in that regard shall be the same. It shall be unlawful for any such person to wear at any public gathering,' or upon any public street or highway, or in any public place whether on or off duty a uniform or cap of the same color or appearance as that used by the regular police officers of the City of Brooklyn Center.] [Section 23 -703. SPECIAL POLICE OFFICER BADGE AND GUN. A special police officer appointed pursuant to this ordinance may wear a special police officer badge or emblem during the time and in the areas for which the appointment is made, said badge to be furnished by -2- the City of Brooklyn Center upon payment of the sum of $10, $5 of which shall be returned to the person upon the termination of such appointment. No special police officer shall wear a gun or be otherwise armed unless such authority is included in the appointment, and such gun may be worn only during the time and in the areas for which the appointment is made. It shall be unlawful for any special police officer to wear or exhibit his badge or to wear a gun except as provided herein.] [Section 23 -704. AUTHORITY RESTRICTION. It shall be unlawful for any person commissioned as a special police officer to exercise any police authority or act as a policeman except in the place or places designated in his appointment and for such period as his appointment shall be in force.] [Section 23 -705. BOND REQUIRED. Every person appointed as a special police officer shall file with the City Clerk a corporate surety bond in the amount of $1,000 upon a form prescribed by the City at the time of filing his oath of office and written acceptance of his appointment. Such bond shall be conditioned upon the faithful discharge of the duties of the office of special police officer and upon compliance with all applicable laws and ordinances.] [Section 23 -706. REQUIREMENTS OF IDENTIFICATION. All applicants for appointment as special police officers shall submit to all reasonable regulations and requirements of the City of Brooklyn Center Police Department as the same shall relate to identification, photographing and fingerprinting.] [Section 23 -707. TERMINATION OF APPOINTMENT. Whenever the purpose for the appointment as a special police officer ceases to exist, the holder of such appointment shall within ten (10) days surrender his badge to the Police Department of the City.] [Section 23 -708. INSURANCE. Whenever a special police officer is appointed at the request of another to assist in patrolling or enforcing the law on the premises of the other's place of business, the person requesting that such appointment be made shall file an appropriate letter with the City agreeing to save the City harmless from any and all liability which may accrue to it by reason of any acts or omissions of the person appointed, and the City may require evidence of insurance or in lieu thereof evidence of financial ability to adequately protect the City. This section shall not be construed to impose any liability upon the City arising out of the appointment of any special police officer.] [Section 23 -709. PENALTY. Any person convicted for the violation of any of the provisions of Sections 23 -701 through 23 -708 may be punished by a fine of not more than seven hundred dollars ($700) or imprisonment not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution.] -3- SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this- - - - - -- - day of--------------- - - - - - , 1987. ---- ------ --- ------ ------------------ Dean Nyquist, Mayor ATTEST: Darlene Weeks, Clerk Date of Publication -------------------------------- Effective Date ------------------------------------- (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter FROM: James Lindsay DATE: July 7, 1987 SUBJECT: Amendment to Chapter 1, Section 1 -101 of the City Ordinances The current City Ordinances which the Code Enforcement Officers use for citing a violation of a barking dog is Chapter 1, Section 1 -110, "Nuisance Prohibited," and Chapter 19, Section 19 -101, "Public Nuisance." Both ordinances are needed in order to issue a violation for complaint of a barking dog. It has been brought to our attention by the City Attorneys that these ordinances are too vague for prosecution as they do not specifically address a barking dog and they refer to animals in the plural rather than a single animal. They have asked that we update the Animal section of the City Ordinances in regard to these issues. Attached is a revised version of Chapter 1, Section 1 -110, which if approved, will address these issues in the single ordinance under Animals and will not require two different ordinances for issuing a violation. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the _______day of__________________ _, 1987 at___________ --- m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the City Animal Ordinance. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 561 -5440 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE N0._____________ AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO PROHIBIT THE DISTURBANCE CAUSED BY A BARKING, HOWLING, OR FIGHTING ANIMAL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 1 - 110. NUISANCE PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any person to keep an animal [s] in any unsanitary pjagP_Qr_ con- or in any way which constitutes a nuisance �iQw��Qg�_fght�g nQ�Qe [under Chapter 19 of the City Ordinances] Q�_ tQ_ �a��taiH_ Qr_ pe�mt _�_QQn��tQD_w�c_QH�g�QQD�b]Y �L�i�Q�Q�_�L�1.��es LQ�,_endangQ�Q_ tie_ sa€ Qt. Y� _�ea�.�.�L_�►Q�.a�s_ � SECTION II. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this -------- day of_________________ __ _ _, 1987. ------------------------------------- Dean Nyquist, Mayor ATTEST: Darlene Weeks, Clerk Date of Publication -------------------------------- Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) 1 /�f Member introduced the following resolution and 0 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF TRUNK HIGHWAY 694 WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Transportation for the State of Minnesota has prepared plans, special provisions, and specifications for the improvement of Trunk Highway No. 393, renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 694, within the corporate limits of the City of Brooklyn Center, from the West River Road to East Corporate limits; and seeks the approval thereof; and WHEREAS, any grading or filling required by this project is deemed to be consistent with the requirements of the Interim Development Regulations for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area administered by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that said plans and special provisions for the improvement of said Trunk Highway within said corporate limits of the City, be and hereby are approved including the elevations and grades as shown and consent is hereby given to any and all changes in grade occasioned by said construction. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City does hereby agree to require the parking of all vehicles, if such parking is permitted within the corporate limits of said City, on said Trunk Highway, to be parallel with the curb adjacent to the highway, and at least 20 feet from any crosswalks on all public streets intersecting said trunk highway. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a radin permit is hereby approved b g g P h Y PP Y the City. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FROM MNDOT FOR A VARIANCE FOR ESTABLISHED WORKING HOUR RESTRICTIONS FOR WORK ON TRUNK HIGHWAY NO. 694 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has presented the City Council with an acceptable plan for mitigating construction noise resulting from the improvement of I -694 (SP 0285 -49 and 2787 -16) while optimizing their construction operations: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, that: 1. The MNDOT plan for noise mitigation is hereby accepted. 2. The MNDOT request for a variance from established working hour restrictions is hereby approved. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE C ENTER 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter /City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp /Public Works Director DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: I -694 Reconstruction Project 1. Construction Plans and Specifications MNDOT has submitted plans and specifications to the City covering the first construction project relating to the improvement of I -694 between Brooklyn Boulevard (C.R. 152) and I -35W, with a request for the City's approval of those plans and specifications. The work on this project consists primarily of the remodeling, rehabilitation and widening of the westbound bridge over the Mississippi River, the widening of the westbound bridge over East River Road (in Fridley), and the approaches to these bridges. The cost for this project is approximately $6 million. Prior to the opening of the new T.H. 252/610 roadway (scheduled for October, 1987) work on the I -694 project will be limited to those portions which will not restrict traffic flow on I -694. This work includes work in the substructures and some work on approaches. Following completion of new T.H. 252/610, westbound traffic will be restricted to two lanes approximately 35 to 50% of the time, and allow 3 lanes at other times. These plans and specifications comply with the "preliminary layout plan" which was previously approved by the City Council. Accordingly, I recommend approval of the plans and specifications (first resolution). July 9, 1987 Page 2 2. MNDOT Request for a Variance from Established Working Hour Restrictions One of the most difficult problems relating to the I -694 reconstruction project is to get the project completed as expeditiously as possible, without violating established standards regarding noise levels and working hours. Much of the work on the first project includes activities which create high noise levels - i.e., demolition, pile driving, etc. so as to minimize the length of time during which construction is in progress and traffic restrictions are in place, MNDOT and its contractor wish to maximize performance by working extra shifts, extra days, etc. Restrictions which apply to the project include: 1. Minnesota Pollution Control Standards and 2. The City of Brooklyn Center's standard construction provisions which state: A. No construction equipment shall be operated between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. B. No work shall be done on Sundays unless special approval is granted by the City. In discussion with MNDOT, we have noted that there are a number of residences in close proximity to the project, and that care must be taken to control the project in a way which assures that construction noise is kept within acceptable limits. MNDOT is currently developing details of their plans to mitigate noise problems. MNDOT staff members will attend the July 3, 1987 City Council meeting to discuss their plans in detail. If, after hearing and discussing MNDOT's plans, the City Council is satisfied that their noise control P lan is acceptable, the City Council should then consider adoption of the second resolution. Respectfully Submitted, GN Sy Kna p PP Public Works Director cc: Bob Brown, MNDOT Transportation Analysis Engineer SK/ CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: Jill Norlander, Administrative Ai DATE: July 8, 1987 RE: MTC Route #26 The Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) will be conducting a hearing on July 22, 1987 to discuss the future of Saturday Route #26. Route #26 travels I94 and TH252 in Brooklyn Center and has 6 daily round trips scheduled from 8 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. I spoke with Dennis Tollefsbol of MTC today regardin g proposed the elimination P of Saturday Route #26. He told me that the RTB subsidizes fares in the Twin City area based on the operating costs minus fares taken in divided by the number of passengers served on a given route. The MTC is making a recommendation to their funding agency, the Regional Transit Board (RTB), to eliminate Saturday Route #26 because the per passenger subsidy amount has exceeded the $2.45 maximum. This conclusion is drawn from a ridership profile done in January, 1987, and 2 previous profiles from November and September of 1986. Those results are summarized below: Profile Date _Subsidy Level September, 1986 $4.23 November, 1986 $3.83 January, 1987 $3.57 When the RTB is approached by this kind of recommendation, they generally will react in one of 3 ways. They will: - drop the route as requested; - let the route out for bid and continue the route with the low bidder providing service (the MTC or other local bus company) ; or - instruct MTC to continue the route as is. As an example, approximately 18 months ago, the MTC recommended Saturday Route #27, which had a similar ridership problem, be eliminated. At that time, the RTB chose to continue the route as it was. JN/ i s "• 1466 A11-1ME0.K,I OiY =N 1 M E T R O P O L I T A N T R A N S I T C O M M I S S I O N 560 -6th Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411 -4398 612/349 -7400 ATTENTION MINNEAPOLIS ROUTE #26 PASSENGERS PUBLIC HEARING The Metropolitan Transit Commission.(MTC) will hold a public hearing on July 22, 1987. The hearing will be held at the Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Nicollet Mall, at 12 :00 PM, noon. The MTC is proposing to discontinue the Route #26 SATURDAY service because of extremely low ridership. If you are unable to attend this meeting please forward your comments to the Service Planning Unit at the address in the letterhead. f - 7 � i 1 CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTE R EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 9, 1987 RE: Camden Avenue Sidewalk 53rd Avenue to 55th Avenue Improvement Project 1987 -10 I The sidewalk on Camden Avenue North, between 53rd Avenue and 55th Avenue North is in very poor and dangerous condition. It must be removed or replaced. Sidewalks are a City transportation facility and their maintenance is a City service. As we do we do for other transportation facilities we look at the specific needs for the sidewalk in this area in order to determine what we should build. The original 1970 sidewalk plan linked activity centers such as commercial, institutional, and park areas with the City neighborhoods. That plan generally established sidewalk on both sides of arterial roadways and collectors in business districts. Generally, sidewalk was on one side in the residential districts. While we looked at alternatives to City sidewalk maintenance those alternatives were rejected because they created confusing jurisdictions. Our principal observations were that the City as the major maintenance responsibility and y � n P y should make the final decisions regarding sidewalk location. The Camden Avenue sidewalk is in a residential area. The 1985 traffic counts were below an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 1,000 An ADT of less than 1,000 is below the ADT of most collector streets in Brooklyn Center. From a construction standpoint, sidewalk on one side of the street is less expensive. However, it is not half the cost because of the cost of removal and restoration. There is very little difference in the cost of replacing one side over the other. The only difference being the number of driveway aprons that must be replaced. �"' 1966 All-A11ERKl Qi'! ri � July 9, 1987 Page 2 I have estimated the cost of replacing sidewalk on both sides, the east side only and the west side only. The cost of that replacement is summarized below and detailed estimates are attached. Replacement on both sides: $77,430 Replacement on east side only: $46,528 Replacement on west side only: $47,298 From a maintenance standpoint the cost of maintaining sidewalk on both sides is twice the cost of maintaining sidewalk on one side. Maintenance would include plowing and replacement work such as proposed under this improvement project. There is no data available from which we can estimate the cost of maintenance. We have surveyed the property owners along Camden Avenue between 53rd Avenue and 55th Avenue. A sample of the questionaire and a map illustrating the results of the questionaire is attached. The map shows that most of the residents preferred placement on both sides. Most of the residents that responded wanted a sidewalk on their side if it was to be replaced on only one side. It is a practice to reconstruct City facilities to current standards. While that normally means enlarging or expanding facilities and services, in this case the opposite is the case. Sidewalk on both sides is not needed for pedestrians or pedestrian volume. Sidewalk on both sides is additional construction cost. It is also additional maintenance cost. It is, therefore, my recommendation that sidewalk be replaced on one side. The east has the greatest support according to the survey and gets more sun in the winter to help keep it clear. In order to expedite replacement of this sidewalk it is recommended that plans and specifications be prepared prior to the City Council meeting for the replacement of sidewalk on one or both sides of Camden Avenue. That would be a minimum amount of work and would help expedite construction in 1987. These plans will not cover any concrete replacement on private property such as driveways. The plans will cover replacement of service walk in the boulevard. There are few that need to be replaced. The replacement could best be made using letter agreements where the property owners agree to pay construction cost when invoiced by the City. I would not recommend assessing that cost. Accordingly, it is recommended that these findings be presented at a hearing on the matter conducted by the City Council at its next Council meeting on July 27, 1987. Property owners would have an opportunity to examine this report and be heard by City Council regarding replacement of the sidewalk on Camden Avenue North between 53rd Avenue and 55th Avenue North. Res ectfull, submitted, Approved for submittal, pvrr, SY K PP ty ineee Director of Public War - HRS /nl CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Project No. 1987 -10 CAMDEN SIDEWALK 53RD to 55TH AVENUE NORTH SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT BOTH SIDES ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Item ----------------------------------- # Contract Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount 1 MOBILIZE /DEMOBILIZE LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 2 REMOVE CONC SIDEWALK SY 1734 4.50 7,803.00 3 SUBCUT & ROOT REMOVAL CY 2601 7.00 18,207.00 4 6 CONC SW W /CL5 AGG BASE SY 231 30.00 6,930.00 5 4" CONC SW W /CL5 AGG BASE SF 13001 2.00 26,002.00 6 SODDING W /4" TOPSOIL SY 1734 2.00 3,468.00 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $63,410.00 CONTINGENCY (10 %) 6,340.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $69,750.00 TECHNICAL SERVICES (9 %) 6,280.00 ADMINISTRATION (1%) 700.00 LEGAL (1%) 700.00 TOTAL $77,430.00 �Y��x���Y�����Y��F�xx�Fxx�x���xx�Y�cx�Y�Y��YT kxxx�Yx�Y��x�F�Y�x��x�F�F�xxkkk���xxk�Y�k�1, kT SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT EAST SIDE ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Item----------------------------------- # Contract Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount - - -- ------------------ - - - - -- - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- 1 MOBILIZE /DEMOBILIZE LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 2 REMOVE CONC SIDEWALK SY 1734 4.50 7,803.00 3 SUBCUT & ROOT REMOVAL CY 1301 7.00 9,107.00 4 6 CONC SW W /CL5 AGG BASE SY 105 30.00 3,150.00 5 4 CONC SW W /CL5 AGG BASE SF 6501 2.00 13,002.00 6 SODDING W /4" TOPSOIL SY 2023 2.00 4,046.00 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $38,108.00 CONTINGENCY (10 %) 3,810.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $41,918.00 TECHNICAL SERVICES (9%) 3,770.00 0 ADMINISTRATION (1 %) 420.00 LEGAL (1 %) 420.00 ----- - - - - -- TOTAL $46,528.00 �' cx��Yxxx��x�xxx: t�' c��Y� 'cxx�'cxx�'c�Yxxxxxx�'c�Yxx kxxxsFx�Y��'cxx�xxxxxxx�Yxx�: xxx�Yxxx�Fxx�x SIDEWALK REPLACEMENT WEST SIDE ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Item----------------------------------- # Contract Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount - - -- ------------------ - - - - -- - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- 1 MOBILIZE /DEMOBILIZE LS 1 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 2 REMOVE CONC SIDEWALK SY 1734 4.50 7,803.00 3 SUBCUT & ROOT REMOVAL CY 1301 7.00 9,107.00 4 6 CONC SW W CL5 AGG BASE SY 126 30.00 3 5 4 -1 CONC SW W /CL5 AGG BASE SF 6501 2.00 13,002.00 6 SODDING W /4" TOPSOIL SY 2023 2.00 4,046.00 SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION $38,738.00 CONTINGENCY (10 %) 3,870.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION $42,608.00 TECHNICAL SERVICES (9%) 3,830.00 ADMINISTRATION (1%) 430.00 LEGAL (1 %) ----- 43 00 TOTAL $47,298.00 \ - �_ -__ it I i , 1 I ---- -- - -- - -- --� 9 - 1 ` i i I t I 1 ---- i - - - -- _ --- J - - - -- 1 - MA - - - - -- I ---- ------ - -- J�� - - - -- +-- - --i - --- - - - - -- ---- -- -' - -- 1 \1 1 , ' ' - - - -- -- I i If If i ' I \ - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - -- - - - -� t� G ' I l I � 1 L I 1� CAMDEN AVENUE & VICINITY j I � 0 400 800 SCALE iN FEET I � PREPARED BY ULTIMAP SHEET 1 OF 21 55TH AVE. N. ' --------------------- 45 544 SIDEWALK SURVEY ¢, LEGEND , r 1 t i 1 439 5 BOTH SIDES 5 ONE SIDE I _ OTHER SIDE ------ - - - - -4 - - - - ----- - - - - -- .. ., SAME SIDE ; r - - -- ` - - -- -- - - - -- -- - - ------- - - - - -- BLANK NO RESPONSE z ------ - - - - -' 33 5 z 5.33 i 5� > L ------ - - - - -- W --------- - -- - -- 5325 f — Q - --------------ST--- < w - 5,350 1 � 1 1 - ----- - -- - - i — — --- -- ---- --- -------�-- m 21 - - -- Z 11 ; i U 1 9 r l7 5334 z r 1 r ---- ---- , r , r _ 5309 r — — -- — -- -- -- -- — — — — ---------------------- 1 i r ✓xa� I 1 I 1 i 7I d 70� 70 " t+C �~ ' --- -- - --- i 1 r 1 r 53RD AVE. N. F7 CAMDEN AVENUE SIDEWALK SURVEY RESULTS 0 200 400 SCALE IN FEET D C�CG��CG3 PREPARED BY ULTIMAP SHEET 2 OF 2 { MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Brooklyn Center Housing Commission DATE: May 11, 1987 SUBJECT: Year 2000 Committee Report The Task The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission has been assigned by the City Council the task of reviewing and commenting on two (2) critical issues in the Year 2000 Report. The report notes that seventy percent (70 %) of the City's housing stock will be forty (40) years of age by the year 2000. The implications of an older housing stock upon the community are profound. The identification of impacted areas by an older housing stock and the eventual policies to be developed as a result of the commission's study constitute one of the tasks before them. The plan also notes that Brooklyn Center is changing from a developing community to a maintenance /redevelopment oriented community. The change to a redeveloping community is directly related to the aging of both our housing stock and our commercial /industrial developments. Redevelopment will afford Brooklyn Center an opportunity to reassess previous development decisions, consider new relationships between land uses, and maintain the City's tax base. Housing Stock At a time of escalating housing costs, Brooklyn Center is blessed with an ample supply of "affordable" housing. The majority of our housing is made up of two (2) and three (3) bedroom ramblers of the 900 to 1100 square foot variety. With adequate maintenance and affordable financing opportunities, Brooklyn Center's housing stock should continue to "rollover" from generation to generation. A strong rollover in housing should produce a continued student population, although somewhat erratic, for the Brooklyn Center School District. The affordability of Brooklyn Center's housing stock will Y g make it an inviting target for speculative investment purposes. Indeed, a significant number of homes throughout Brooklyn Center are currently owned by absentee owners. The potential for neglect and neighborhood deterioration is of major concern should this trend become pervasive. The Housing Commission is also concerned that existing City ordinances be enforced in a strong and timely manner. Ordinances relating to junk cars, home occupations, weeds, refuse, and other nuisances are viewed as important tools in the prevention of neighborhood deterioration. Coupled with the enforcement of existing ordinances, an effort should be made to inform new residents of Brooklyn Center about existing ordinances. It is proposed that an information package be provided to all new homestead applicants. The information package would provide a brief synopsis of City regulations and codes. -2- The Housing Commission anticipates a need for additional senior housing alternatives. Senior housing is an integral part of a cohesive housing policy. Senior housing is fundamental to a "rollover" housing program. However, given Brooklyn Center's size, it is imperative that new construction be phased in over a prolonged period of time. With limited land available for any new development, there will be a great deal of external pressure to develop now. As the City's population ages, the ability to absorb additional senior housing will go hand in hand. Housing for the poor is an area that needs to be addressed. To date, Brooklyn Center's contribution has been limited primarily to Section 8 programs of the federal government. While the need for such housing as g not diminished, especially during a downturn in the economy, federal support for such programs pp p g has been significantly reduced. In the near future, many apartment buildings constructed with federal money to provide shelter for the poor will no longer be under contract with the federal government to provide subsidized rental units. A significant number of those units will experience a dramatic increase in rents as the owners bring their rents in line with the current market. As a result, the need to address housing the poor, both elderly and families, will be further compounded. In order to position ourselves to deal with many of the housing problems Brooklyn Center anticipates, the City should consider the timely acquistion of land parcels for future housing projects. -3- The Housing Commission's concern for the overall maintenance and repair of the City's housing stock must be emphasized. Not only does the individual housing unit provide a basic shelter necessity for Brooklyn Center residents, it also represents the major investment for most homeowners. Protecting that investment through timely repair and maintenance is in the interest of the individual homeowner as well as that of the surrounding neighborhood. From a City perspective, residential development in Brooklyn Center represents fifty -five (55) percent of the property tax received to provide services to the community. A deterioration of the City's housing valuation from a lack of maintenance could have a severe impact on the City's ability to fund essential services in the future. For example, a ten (10) percent devaluation in the overall market value of the housing stock could cost the City in excess of $200,000 in today's dollars. It is apparent to the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission that the aging of our housing stock is a matter of concern that needs to be addressed. It also provides an opportunity for the City to benefit from a more affordable housing stock. Programs such as Brooklyn Center's rehabilitation grant program should be encouraged as well as our efforts to provide low interest mortgages for first time home buyers. It is important to note that some problems associated with the -4- aging of our housing stock are easily identified; however, not all problems are readily determined. The Housing Commission cannot, based upon our current information, quantify the magnitude of the problem nor can we establish realistic goals or policy recommendations. It is obvious to the Commission that the rehab grant program should continue. The obvious questions are: At what level? Who is not being served? What is being neglected under current programs? Other questions will surface as the Commission continues to address housing related problems. Further information is both desirable and needed. Specific data from assessing and planning would provide insight as to the numbers and types of home repairs the City should anticipate. Coupled with demographic information, the Commission should be able to estimate the number and types of grants and loans necessary to insure the maintenance of our housing stock. Building permits pulled for major repairs (roofs, mechanical, electrical, etc.) could provide a great deal of planning information. Demographic information will also provide a valuable tool when recommending other types of housing programs and in describing and focusing local initiatives. Redevelopment As noted in the Year 2000 Committee Report, Brooklyn Center is entering a period when most, if not all, land within the City will be developed. Future development will obviously be -5- redevelopment and will be initiated in order to achieve a better use of existing land. Redevelopment will not only affect housing but also the commercial and industrial sites of the community. The relationship of housing and commercial/ industrial uses will have to be re- examined. At the same time, consideration should be given to a commercial /industrial maintenance code. A draft development policy is to be prepared for comment from both the Planning and Housing Commissions. Any redevelopment policy drafted should give emphasis on maintaining employment opportunities in Brooklyn Center that are more than minimum wage jobs. The policy should also recognize Brooklyn Center's unique location (I -694 and I -94) and its potential as a regional retail area. Also, to the extent possible, emphasis should be made to recognize the international aspect of the business world Competition for jobs is not with the Brooklyn Park's and Crystal's but, rather, the San Paulos, Mexico City, and Bonn's of the world. To the extent possible, the City's development policy should consider the competitive nature of the world economy and should describe the City's role and intent in assisting private development. Conclusion The Housing Commission agrees with the report of the Year 2000 Committee in its identification of trends and issues of concern to Brooklyn Center. In the areas of specific concern to the -6- Housing Commission, commission members feel that they have insight as to the nature of some of the problems; however, specific data will be necessary in order for the commission to make solid, realistic proposals to be incorporated into a plan. The Housing Commission has detailed a list of desired information necessary for specific recommendations. Staff has that request, and it is our understanding that the necessary ata is now, , or will be, programmed with Logis. Once that is accomplished, the Housing Commission looks forward to addressing the problem discussed and taking a positive step towards the year 2000. -7- M & C No. 87 -13 July 9, 1987 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Implementation Plan - 1984 Pay Equity Act To the Honorable Mayor and City Council: Under the direction of the 1984 Pay Equity Act passed by the Minnesota State Legislature, municipalities and other political subdivisions must adopt by August 1, 1987 a plan of implementation. Among other requirements in the plan, it requires that "equitable compensation relationships be established in a political subdivision compensation plan." Attached please find a memorandum from the Personnel Coordinator to myself documenting the methodology of our compensation analysis under the Pay Equity Act (see attachment #1). The following paragraphs describe our implementation plan for meeting these State mandates. The attached resolution and compensation plan, if adopted, will meet the requirements within the State adopted Pay Equity Act. The City Manager's proposal to the City Council for meeting the 1984 Pay Equity Act mandate is to raise the salary range of all positions falling below the initial regression line analysis of our existing compensation plan (see attachment #2). To make this as simple as possible, we have matched the proposed new salary ranges for all positions to steps in the City's existing compensation plan format (see attachment #3). After this "matching process" was complete, a second regression line analysis was conducted using the proposed new salary ranges and all positions, with the exception of five, fell within the 20% regression analysis corridor (see attachment #4). Those positions falling within this corridor, we believe, meet the "equitable relationship" requirement of the State mandate. The five positions above the corridor are custodian, city engineer, mechanic, police officer, and police sergeant. The latter three positions are classified in bargaining units and changes in their salary ranges must be arrived at by negotiation and /or arbitration. The maximum rate for all of these positions may have to be frozen, reduced by lesser salary increases, or reduced over time to meet the "equitable relationships" requirement of the State law. Funds appropriated in the City's 1987 Budget for Pay Equity Act �` implementation amount, to $35,000. Because of the expenses of this State mandate and the funding limitations restricting the City, we recommend implementation by phasing in the movement of employees within the new salary ranges over a three year time period. The City Manager will be responsible for administering the transition from the current compensation plan to the proposed compensation plan within the City Council approved budget limitations for the years 1987, 1988, and 1989. We estimate the annual increased cost of complying with the Pay Equity Act of between $90,000 to $100,000. By making adjustments to the City's compensation plan gradually over three years, it is anticipated that the State mandates will be met while minimizing the overburden to the City's Budget. Continual monitoring of compensation relationships between various City positions will be necessary. The adjustments recommended in this report are the first step in an ongoing process to meet the Pay Equity Act requirements of "equitable compensation relationships." The staff recommends your favorable consideration of the attached resolution adopting an amended compensation plan for the City of Brooklyn Center dated July 13, 1987. Respectfully submitted, Gerald G. Spli ter City Manager /4C1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, Section 2.07 of the City Charter for the City of Brooklyn Center states that the City Council is to fix the salary or wages of all officers and employees of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council, on December 22, 1986, did adopt Resolution No. 86 -202 which set wages and salaries for the calendar year 1987 by adoption of the Position and Classification Plan (Schedules A through K) for the calendar year 1987 which sets ranges and maximums which the City Manager shall be authorized to pay in classified positions; and WHEREAS, authorized wage adjustments, not to exceed the maximums contained therein, became effective January 1, 1987; and WHEREAS, the 198 Minnesota Pay Equity Act requires every political subdi- vision to establish "equitable compensation relationships" between its employees; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Amended 1987 Employee Position and Classification Plan; and WHEREAS, the Amended 1987 Employee Position and Classification Plan incor- porates changes to meet the requirements of establishing "equitable compensation relationships "; and WHEREAS, the Amended 1987 Employee Position and Classification Plan estab- lishes that pay increases will be awarded on a pay for performance basis; and WHEREAS, the structure of the 1987 Amended Employee Position and Classifi- cation Plan provides for pay increases awarded for improvements in job performance; and WHEREAS, an individual employee's movement through his or her respective pay schedule reflects a progression in corresponding levels or improved job performance: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby amends wages and salaries for the calendar year 1987 by adoption of the attached Amended Position and Classification Plan (Schedules A through J) for the calendar year 1987 which sets ranges and maximums which the City Manager shall be authorized to pay in class if i ed ositions• and P , BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager be authorized to employ such temporary part -time and temporary full -time employees as may be necessary, and to establish competitive rates of pay for such help consistent with the 1987 budget appropriations; and RESOLUTION NO. 87- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Amended 1Q8 Employee Position and Classifi- . � cation Plan shall become effective August 1, 1987. Date Mayor ATTEST: 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. Attachment +1 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Geralyn R. Barone, Personnel Coordinator 101 DATE: July 9, 1987 SUBJECT: Methodology for Determining Compensation Inequities Under the 1984 Pay Equity Act Requirements The 1984 Pay : Equity Act requires every political subdivision in Minnesota to - establish "equitable compensation relationships" between female- dominated, male- dominated, and balanced classes of employees. As you know, the City of Brooklyn Center and a number of other local jurisdictions contracted with Control Data Business Advisors to conduct a job analysis and evaluation study. The results of the study are manifested by a hierarchy of authorized City job classifications. The following report explains the City's use of the study results in determining compensation inequities. DETERMINING COMPENSATION INEQUITIES The pay equity law does not provide any formula -for measuring whether compensation relationships are reasonable or unreasonable, nor does the law assign relative weights to job value versus market value. The difficulty of the task of determining total compensation reasonableness between employees has been compounded by the imposition on cities of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) on April 15, 1986. The overtime obligations of the FLSA for nonexempt personnel requires cities to specifically address the compensation differentials between nonexempt employees (mandatory overtime compensation required) and exempt employees (no overtime compensation required). The City has used a gender- neutral approach to the determination and resolution of compensation inequities. This neutral approach is consistent with the approach traditionally discussed in academic literature and used by major corporate organizations in their compensation programs. Under this approach, the City has been able to diagram its compensation and job evaluation results utilizing statistical regression analysis of all full -time Positions, regardless of gender, with plus and minus deviation parameters determined as acceptable to the City. Using this method, the City can ascertain whether any individual position's compensation level is unacceptably high or low in comparison to its determined acceptable deviation. -2- Attachment 2 of M & C No. 87 -13 represents bivariate correlation and regression summarizing the relationships between two variables: point values, determined in the job analysis study; and 1987 maximum hourly wage rates of positions. All City positions are plotted on a scattergram, where point values are designated on the horizontal axis, and dollars representing hourly wage rates are designated on the vertical axis. The plotting of the male- dominated and female- dominated positions shows how wage rates and point values vary for each position and in relation to one another. The regression line is derived from the pattern of points plotted on the scattergram; it is the line that best describes the relationship of the points (known as the line of "best fit ") and is calculated using the least- squares criterion measure. We believe this technical analysis is required to meet Pay Equity Act requirements. Lines reflecting parameters of ten percent have been calculated and drawn above and below the regression line, creating a twenty percent corridor from one side of the line to the other. (Most jurisdictions participating in the Control Data study also are working with a twenty percent regression corridor.) The purpose of the corridor is to account for any error in the regression line, and positions falling outside of the corridor indicate an inequity in the existing compensation system. These are the inequities which must be dealt with in the City's future compensation plan. In response to the requirements of the FLSA, the City made the assumption that employees in certain exempt positions, on average over a one -year period, work forty -two hours rather than forty hours each work week without receiving overtime compensation. An additional five percent in wages was added to the regression line wage rate for these positions, thus alleviating any concerns over meeting the requirements of the FLSA. CONCLUSION Based on this analysis, changes in the City's compensation plan are indicated in the proposed Employee Position and Classification Plan. EXISTING (1987) COMPENSATION PLAN REGRESSION l , IALYS IS FOR BROOKLYN GEr 36 110% .34 LINE ll 32 ,RE GRESUION 30 LINE 2R 90% LINE 26 fft n 24 �f 22 1R a 14 10 � x C') s+ =r 3 30 50 70 90 110 :3 rot - FOIhdTS t, MALES x FEMALES N Attachment +3 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6 -24 -87 EXECUTIVE PLAN 1987 PROPOSED PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PERFORM. PERFORM. RANGE RANGE POSITION MAXIMUM MAXIMUM Q City Manager 33.11 33.11 Director of Public Works 27.13 27.13 Director of Finance 25.23 25.23 Chief of Police 24.58 24.58 Director of Recreation 22.15 22.15 * Director of Pln & Ins 21.00 g p 21.91 City Assessor 21.00 21.00 Liquor r Stores Manager ager 18.73 18.73 * Denotes salary range adjusted due to pay equity act CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6 -24 -87 0 0 0 9 SUPERVISORY PROFESSIONAL PLAN ----------------------------- 1987 1987 PROPOSED PROPOSED PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PERFORM. GRADE PERFORM. GRADE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE POSITION MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM ---------------- - - - - -- --- ----- - - - - -- --- - -- City Engineer 22.99 S39C 22.99 S39C Police Captain 21.35 S36C 21.35 S36C HRA Coordinator 21.35 S36C 21.35 S36C Public Works Superintendent 20.83 S35C 20.83 S35C • Ass't Dir of Finance 17.52 S28C 20.83 S35C • Personnel Coordinator 15.88 S24C 19.83 S33C • Planner 13.03 S16C 17.10 S27C • Administrative Ass't,Police 13.03 S16C 17.10 S27C • Insp /Building Official 16.28 S25C 16.68 S26C • Staff Accountant 11.81 S12C 16.68 S26C • Public Works Coordinator 15.49 S23C 16.28 S25C • City Clerk 14.74 S21C 16.28 S25C • Office Manager, Police 14.39 S20C 16.28 S25C * Supv, Streets & Parks 15.12 S22C 15.88 S24C � Supv p Public Utilities 15.12 S22C 15.88 S24C * Golf Course Manager 15.12 S22C 15.88 S24C * Program Supv., Recreation 12.40 S14C 15.88 S24C Appraiser II 15.49 S23C 15.49 S23C Inspector, Planning & Insp. 15.12 S22C 15.12 S22C Maintenance Supervisor 14.39 S20C 14.39 S20C • Admin. Aid, Police 11.24 SlOC 12.71 S15C Supv, Liquor Retail 11.81 S12C 11.81 S12C • Aquatics Supervisor 9.69 S4C 11.81 S12C • Admin. Aid, C.Mgr's Office 11.24 S10C 11.81 S12C * Denotes salary ranges adjusted due to pay equity act CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6 -24 -87 Q TECHNICAL_ --------------------------- 1987 1987 PROPOSED PROPOSED PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PAY PLAN PERFORM. GRADE PERFORM. GRADE RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE POSITION MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM -------------------------------------------------------------------- * Engineering Tech IV,, 15.82 T37C 17.46 T41C Engineering Tech III 13.64 T31C 13.64 T31C Maintenance Custodian 12.67 T28C 12.67 T28C Lead Custodian = 11.48 T24C 11.48 T24C Public Works Dispatcher 11.20 T23C 11.20 T23C * Payroll Technician 10.40 T20C 11.20 T23C Public Safety Dispatcher 11.20 - 11.20 T23C Custodian 10.66 T21C 10.66 T21C * Assessment Technician 9.42 T16C 10.66 T21C • Utilities Technician 9.42 T16C 10.66 T21C • Accounting Technician 10.40 T20C 10.66 T21C • Engineering Secretary 9.42 T16C 9.90 T18C • Ping & Insp Secretary 9.42 T16C 9.90 T18C * CEO 8.75 T13C 9.90 T18C • Police Secretary 9.42 T16C 9.66 T17C • Park & Rec Secretary 9.42 T16C 9.66 T17C • Finance Secretary 8.53 T12C 9.66 T17C Data Entry Operator 8.53 T12C 9.66 T17C * Admin. /Licenses Secretary 9.42 T16C 9.66 T17C * Admin. /Elections Secretary 8.53 T12C 8.75 T13C * Receptionist 7.73 T8C 8.53 T12C * Denotes wage ranges adjusted due to pay equity law P wmpm CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6 -24 -87 PAY SCHEDULES WHICH ARE BARGAINED POLICE OFFICERS --------------- 1987 CONTRACT RANGE MAX Police Officer 15.41 Police Sergeant 17.20 LOCAL 49 1987 HOURLY WAGE RATE Maintenance III 12.60 Maintenance II 12.10 Mechanic 12.60 Night Service Person 11.90 Maintenance I 8.72 D D CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6 -24 -87 W UOR STORES PART -TIME HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE -------------------------------------------- 1987 PROPOSED PAY PLAN PAY PLAN HOURLY HOURLY RATE RATE POSITION MAXIMUM MAXIMUM ------------------------------------------------ Clerk /Stocker 6.15 6.15 Cashier 6.15 6.15 *Cashier /Office Assistant 7.15 7.70 *Denotes wage range adjusted due to pay equity act i PROPOSED COMPENSATION FLAN ADJUSTMENT REGRESSION ANALYSIS FOR BROOKLYN GEKT'ER 38 110% 36 LINE 34 REGRES ION LINE 32 i 30 0% LINE _ 28 26 24 22 20 a 1a 14 12 rut, 4 10 �� Y 3 30 50 70 90 110 POINTS A MALES x FEMALES Labor relations C y Smythe Comparable worth: what to do after the study The 1984 Comparable Worth Law 1. Conduct a job evaluation study to implementation of pay equity. Cities (CWL) established the requirement determine the relative job worth of should be able to make judgments as to that, subject to the Public Employment jobs. whether inequities exist after they have Labor Relations Act, every city shall 2. Conduct a market study to deter- completed both a market study and the establish equitable compensation mine the value of jobs in the market relative job value study. relationships. place. The timetable for a city's non -union The CWL does not define equitable 3. Give the union(s) representing group could have definite dates. How - compensation relationships in specific employees a "report" containing the ever, a city may not be able to give operational terms. It enumerates the results of the job evaluation system. either the timetable or the magnitude principles broadly, leaving the specific 4. Determine the relative weight of any adjustments for unionized groups definition of equitable compensation which the city wishes to assign to because the city must negotiate any relationships to: relative job worth versus relative mar- judgment of compensation inequities 1. The city if the employees are not ket value. The CWL's statement that with a union(s) and /or present it to an unionized. relative job value should be given pri- arbitrator. Neither the union nor the 2. The city and a union for non- mary consideration would appear to arbitrator are obligated to agree with essential employee groups. dictate that a minimum of 51 percent the city's assessment of inequities weight be given to relative job value as based on market and job worth values. 3. The city, a union, and outside compared to a maximum of 49 percent The actual inequity adjustments that arbitrator(s) for essential employee for market value. The specific weight - are the result of negotiations or arbitra- groups. ing in each city must be determined by tion could vary significantly from the The CWL requires cities to measure the city for non -union employees; by city's original concepts. the relative worth of jobs in the city by the city and a union for non - essential In the report to the Department of means of a job evaluation system; unionized employees; and by the city, Employee Relations, therefore, a city measure the market -value worth of a union, and /or an arbitrator for essen- may not be able to state for its union- jobs for similar positions outside of the tial employees. ized employees whether inequities city; and give primary consideration in 5. File a report on the city's imple- exist, the timing of dealing with any negotiating or establishing compensa- mentation plan to the Minnesota inequities, or the cost of dealing with tion relationships to the measured com- Department of Employee Relations. any inequities, until after the comple- parable work value of their employees. The plan must include an identification tion of negotiations and /or arbitration. The sequence of actions by a city of classes for which a compensation In summary, a city must develop under the CWL is: inequity exists and a timetable for equitable compensation relationships based on its best judgments of how to weigh market and job worth values, how the city's unions react to the results of the city's market and job evaluation studies, and how arbitrators choose to use the city's market and job EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION evaluation data There is no simple formula which a city, a union, or an arbitrator can use Specialists in: to make compensation decisions. The — Job Analysis and — Market Pricing CWL's only stated criterion is "reason - Descriptions Surveys ableness." How the courts may review — Job Evaluation — Merit Pay Plans the manner in which cities, unions, and Experienced consultants in all types of employee com - arbitrators have met their obligations pensation in the public sector. Proven results in compar- under the CWL is unknown. However, able worth. Write for details or call: the courts thus far have not been prone to make definitive determinations as to i� STANTON GROUP how employers should compensate DCA, Inc. employees within a comparable worth 400 DCA Center (612) 541 -7586 context. ■ 13100 Wayzata Blvd. or Minnetonka, MN 55343 (612) 541 -7534 20 Sep +e m bey- l U 4o Minnesota Cities - stl3r :P-'S ,. _ y •r 'R'° -��?5 �N' -n. -, aT�'�._,^" ��,". Labor relations C S m y th e Yth P r � - r 1 r D � •te ry � " ± -?'� • a y,� ] i.� / � t- ;i �; �� a - 1 Yr.i�a i✓ 7 I T jl ��1 1.1 �i0 � 1 b..i �. i�w_J' Part II value. Cities, unions, and /or arbitrators pensation) and their exempt employees Last month, this column dealt with are left to determine the standards for (no overtime compensation). the specific procedural and substantive reasonableness subject to court review Failure by a city to adequately requirements of Minnesota's 1984 after August 1, 1987. address these differentials may leave Comparable Worth Law. The broadly The difficulty of determining total the city vulnerable to: stated general obligation the law places compensation reasonableness between 1. Legal action under the comparable on cities, unions, and arbitrators is to employees has been compounded by worth legislation by exempt employees establish reasonable compensation rela- the imposition on cities of the Federal alleging unreasonable total compensa- tionships between employees based on Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) on tion relationships. measured job and market value. l April 15, 1986. The overtime obli a- 2. Unionization of supervisory g P Y The law does not provide any for - tions of the FLSA for non - exempt (exempt) employee groups (which mula to measure whether a compensa- personnel will require cities to specifi- would then have the right to arbitrate tion relationship(s) is reasonable or cally address the compensation differ- their labor disputes with the cities the unreasonable, nor does it assign rela- entials between their non - exempt same as "essential employee" tive weights to job value versus market employees (mandatory overtime com- groups). In order to avoid lawsuits or the unionization of supervisory /manage- COMPENSATION ment employee groups, cities should EMPLOYEE design their compensation relationships under the comparable worth law to include FLSA considerations. In the past, a common situation occurred Specialists in: where a supervisor who was not eligi- — Job Analysis and — Market Pricing ble for overtime a work a same Descriptions Surveys p worked th e — Job Evaluation — Merit Pay Plans number of hours as the employee Experienced consultants in all types of employee com- supervised, however, the supervisor's pensation in the public sector. Proven results in compar- pay for the period was less than the able worth. pay of the employee supervised. This Write for details or call: situation, which will perhaps be more common because of the FLSA's obli lx� STANTON GROUP gations, is quite inconsistent with the DCA, Inc. 400 DCA Center (612) 541 -7586 principles of the comparable worth 13100 Wayzata Blvd. or law. ■ Minnetonka, MN 55343 (612) 541 -7534 ELEVATED TANK SERVICE INC. Water Tower Specialists All Work Guaranteed 0 WELDING 0 NEW ROOFS TWENTY FIVE YEARS EXPERIENCE NEW RISERS SANDBLASTING BOARD OF HEALTH AND AWWA PAINTING BONDED AND APPROVED INTERIOR COATINGS NEW SHELLS INSURED'' MEMBER AMERICAN WATERWORKS ASSOCIATION Insulated Frost Jackets of i Double Metal Construction WATER TOWER MAINTENANCE 1 i TWENTY -FOUR HOUR Rolland Olson BUS: (605) 332-1360 EMERGENCY SERVICE P.O. BOX 104 RES: (605) 446 -3261 SIOUX FALLS, S. D. 57101 40 �fOb �qg�O Minnesota Cities Labor relati Cy Smythe Comparable worth: compensation inequities, Part I The 1986 amendments to the state's tions bears reasonable relationship 1) criteria is proportionately different. 1986 Comparable Worth Law did not to one another, 2) to similar positions The law thus creates confusion in change the general mandate in the law. outside of the political subdivision, 3) terms of the mandated goals of a city's Section 471.992 (Equitable Compensa- among related job classes and among compensation program. An additional tion Relationships) continues to state in various levels with the same occupa- source of confusion in the law is the Subd. 1 (Establishment): tional group. switch from the general mandate in ". . . every political subdivision of However, in the next subdivision, Section 471.992 to establish equitable this state shall establish equitable com- the law shifts its focus and states that compensation relationships between pensation relationships between positions bear reasonably related com- "classes" of employees based on female- dominated, male- dominated, pensation relationships to one another whether they're dominated by males and balanced classes of employees." if 1) compensation is comparable for or females, to a mandate; that the The law is inconsistent, however, in positions which require comparable compensation between "positions" be the manner in which it defines equita- skill, effort, responsibility, working reasonable. ble /reasonable compensation relation- conditions and other relevant work- A city attempting to determine its ships. Section 471.993, Subd. 1 states related criteria, and 2) compensation obligations under the law is faced with that political subdivisions must assure for positions requiring differing skill, a general- purpose statement which first that their compensation plans provide effort, responsibility, working condi- mandates equitable compensation rela- that the compensation for various posi- tions and other relevant work- related tionships between employee groups defined on the basis of gender and then states that the city must establish reasonable compensation relationships EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION t gender Pos without reference While future revisions of the Com- Specialists in: parable Worth Law may clarify a city's — Job Analysis and — Market Pricing obligation under the law and eliminate Descriptions Surveys conflicting definitions and mandates, — Job Evaluation — Merit Pay Plans cities must comply with the existing Experienced consultants in all types of employee com- law. They have also received directions pensation in the public sector. Proven results in compar- from the Minnesota Department of able worth. Employee Relations which have. the Write for details or call: appearance of legal mandates but which STANTON GROUP are in fact suggestions from the depart- DCA, Inc. ment. 400 DCA Center (612) 541 -7586 These departmental directions and 13100 Wayzata Blvd. or cities' obligations under the law will be Minnetonka, MN 55343 (612) 541 -7534 the subject of subsequent parts to this article. ■ EHLERS AwD ASSOC, INC. KBM2 INC. INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS ENGINEERING- Long-term capital financing and acquisition of funds for municipalities. 507 Marawtte Avenue. Minneapolis, Wnnewta 55102 . r Telephone: (612) 339 -8291 ARCHITECTURE GRAND PON 201 REDWOOD FALLS, MIL 64283 SEMID.U. MIL 30401 (701) 772-7156 (507) 637-8853 C218)751-4790 Illllllll�i"i(m�Vu 1111'"" " "' �, 38 No vember 1q?b Minnesota Cities Labor relation Cy Smythe Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part II t Part I of this series of articles on the tion of compensation equity /inequity. tion of compensation inequities which state's 1984 Comparable Worth Law The law does not appear to require are not solely gender- oriented. These pointed out inconsistencies in the law. any such analysis. Other approaches approaches will be the topic of Part III �I The law begins with an emphasis on are available to assist in the determina- of this series. ■ pay equity between male - dominated and female- dominated groups but shifts gears and thereafter concerns itself with general pay equity without regard to gender. This shift from a concern with pay equity between genders to a general pay equity concern is further Total concrete confused by the law's dual definition of WELLS building systems reasonable pay relationships. A Minnesota Department of Employee Relations (DOER) booklet, Local Government Pay Equity Supple- i ment for Cities, October 1984, doesn't alleviate the confusion. It minimiz the law's gender -free definitions of reason - w able compensation relationships and f instructs public employers using a defi- nition of rea sonable compensation that Scott County Highway Department Office and com P Maintenance Garage 1S gender - based. MTC Bus Garage, Rochester, MN Thus, the law states in Section 471.993, Subd. 1 that compensation for positions should bear reasonable rela- tionship to one another, to similar posi- tions outside the political subdivision, , and among related classes. In Subd. 2, it states that compensation for posi- tions is reasonable if it's comparable for positions with comparable skill, Ramsey ood untN Parks Maintenance Belle Plaine Fire Department Maplew, effort, responsibility, working condi- tions, and other relevant criteria. The All building systems are NOT created equal DOER booklet, on the other hand, concentrates on measuring differences A WELLS precast system provides low life cycle costs, fast in pay rather than differences in total construction and design flexibility. Durable concrete costs compensation, and also provides less to heat, cool, insure and maintain; it does not rust, burn, instruction regarding differences in pay dent, or rot. between males and females. While the law emphasizes compensation based on for more information for your building project "comparable work value" between positions, the booklet emphasizes pay Call us today! equity between males and females. The booklet invites the political.sub- Call 1 -800- 722 -2229 division to concentrate on job value points versus pay for males and females, or draw male salary lines and wEr_Ls MN TOLL FREE female salary lines on a graph to deter- 1 -800- 722 -2229 -_ 507 -553 -3138 mine pay inequities. In so doing it ignores market value in any determina- Box 308, Wells, MN 56097 December 1986 19 Labor relations C • y Sm y Comparable worth: Determining; compensation inequities, f art III Parts I and II of this series on which establishes reasonable compen- in the value of fringe benefits between I comparable worth indicated that Min- sation relationships between all employee groups. Additionally, the nesota's law is inconsistent in its defi- employees, the system will not by employer should gather and review nitions of compensation equity and its definition be unreasonable based on appropriate labor - market data needs guidelines for resolving compensation sexual, racial, or any other differences relative to a city's compensation struc- inequities. A state Department of between employees. ture, and make final adjustments in Employee Relations booklet, Local Accordingly, most employers have employee compensation accordingly. Government Pay Equity Supplement not computed and do not intend to Finally, the employer needs to deter - for Cities, further complicates imple- compute male and female salary lines mine an acceptable variation from the mentation of the law. as the department recommends. They "all employee compensation line" (a While the law requires the identifica- have rather drawn "all employee salary plus or minus percentage from the tion and resolution of compensation lines" so as to establish and maintain line). Cities have chosen figures any - inequities between all employees, the reasonable compensation relationships where between five percent and 15 booklet emphasizes identification of ine- between all employees. Many cities are percent plus or minus from the line. quities by sex. Many public employers using such an approach because it Cities are learning that the task of have rejected the department's sex- reduces the possibility of generating measuring compensation inequities based definition of equity in favor of the hostile attitudes within employee based on job values and market value law's general definition. This rejection groups based on sex. isn't easy. Increasingly, however, is based on the proposition that follow- Drawing such an "all employee sal- they're determining that their best ing the department's booklet could ary line" is, of course, only one step in approach is to be concerned with com- result in creating inverse discrimination employers' attempts to identify com- pensation inequities for all employees claims. pensation inequities. The employer and not to concentrate on merely male If the compensation system is one must adjust the line if differences exist versus female inequities. Cities are coming to believe that this approach offers an opportunity to develop a credible and justifiable compensation program. - Part IV will outline the approach •YOU SAVE TIME WITH AN L Z HEAVY many cities are using to identify and DUTY SNOW PLOW OR MINI -PLOW resolve compensation inequities. ■ • SNOW ROLLS OVER IN FRONT OF PLOW • RUGGED ATTACHMENTTO TRUCK FRAME • CLOSE HOOKUP TO CHASSIS FRAME HEAVY DUTY IMPROVES TURNING RADIUS OFTRUCK SNOW PLOWS • MOUNTING HITCH ASSEMBLY DOES NOT COMBINATION JET /VACUUM EXTEND FRONT BUMPER a RAISED PLOWING LIGHTS HI & LO CLEANING OF SANITARY • 98 % OF THE L -Z SNOW PLOW IS BEAR WITH TURN SIGNALS STORM SEWERS MANUFACTURED IN OUR OWN PLANT a BOTTOM ANGLE IRON 4" x 3" x • HEAVY DUTY HITCH FRAME AND LIFT 3/8" HEAVY DUTY SPRINGS FRAME. ANGLE LEFT & RIGHT 30° . -- 318 x 6" REVERSIBLE CUTTING EDGE 3/8" ROLLED FLAT BAR MAINTAIN • 12 GAUGE MOLDBOARD 29" HIGH WITH RUGGED TROUBLE FREE PLOWING CUTTING EDGE. MOLDBOARD WIDTH 72 " -78 "- 84 "- 90 " -96" MONARCH HEAVY DUTY HYDRAULIC TURN CYLINDERS • ADJUSTABLE SHOES • 3/4" x 2" RADIUSTURNTABLE • 3/8" ANGLE A" FRAME UNDER WITH MAXI -STOPS TURNTABLE FOR GREATER PUSHING FORCE PIPE SERVICES CORPORATION L -Z COMPANY, INC. " ° °�`°" " °'�°w "W °�' Cbrrn9. Tartiep an° Inpcn°n L=Z 1881 Rice Street • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113.612- 488 -2571 13706 y Minm—ka, MN 55141 (614) 918 -9614 24 -J;tn ww tA, (� g Minnesota Cities �n _ a Y ..- vs4: i._ s. Y�. rw .'t�f+.+...raa,.',.,m±'- x c..i uet Y.siry.+S _'.. >.� :..ai�3�.ur.L'ia.'1:- 9 ! ' .t- .. ., r : - Cy Smythe Parts I and II of this series deline- Figure 1 ated the substantive inconsistencies $ within the state's Comparable Worth Law. Part III discussed the sex - neutral . . . • . • . approach which is being taken by many Minnesota public employers to resolve m compensation inequities between z , • • • • ' employees. . . . . The sex - neutral approach indentifies o and resolves compensation inequities ' between all employees rather than only . • . . between male and female employees. Cities can thus avoid generating or o ' aggravating hostilities between male " and female employees within the .rob Evaluation Points employer's jurisdiction. These jurisdic- tions are diagramming their compensa- Figure 2 tion /job evaluation values for all $ best fit employees rather than the separate • , line male /female diagrams shown in the example provided in the State Depart- w ment of Employee Relations booklet ' Local Government Pay Equity Supple- x • • ' ment for Cities. An "all employee" diagram relation- ship between compensation and job val- m ue would appear as shown in Figure 1. , A line of "best fit" based on these e compensation and point values can be C developed either by drawing the line Job Evaluation Points free -hand or by regression analysis to give an indication of divergence (see Figure 3 10% above Figure 2). $ line An acceptable plus -or -minus com- 10% below pensation deviation from the trend line line can be drawn. The most commonly cn used deviation from the trend line is 10 " percent plus /minus (indicated by dotted x �, lines in Figure 3). o Outside - market compensation co m- . • < parisons can be either superimposed on this diagram and /or calculated and , analyzed separately relative to each employee's salary in considering the v - relationship of an employee's salary to Job Evaluation Points the 10 percent plus /minus corridor. A number of public employers are for any employee: If an employee's made. then using the following "rule of current compensation is within the 10 Part V of this series of articles will thumb" in their consideration of percent plus /minus corridor (between discuss alternative approaches when an whether a "comparable worth compen- the dotted lines figure 3) no adjustment employee's compensation is outside sation adjustment" needs to be made in the employee's compensation will be the 10 percent plus /minus corridor. ■ 32 Fe bru GLrw �� Minnesota Cities Labor relations Cy Smythe Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part V The first two parts of this series centered on what the author feels are Figure 1 10% above inconsistencies in the state's compara- $ , - line ble worth law. Parts III and IV dis- cussed the sex - neutral approach to the 10 % .below • ' line determination and resolution of com- N ' • % , pensation inequities which many cities are using. Such an approach is consist- c5 — " • . ent with the one traditionally discussed ' • % ' in academic literature and which many • , ' major corporate organizations use in Cd their compensation programs. • _ - Under such an approach cities have diagrammed their compensation and job evaluation results using an "all employee" trend line with plus -or- Job Evaluation Points minus deviation parameters the city has Figure 2 10% above determined as acceptable. Using this $ - - line method a city can readily ascertain , whether any individual employee's s Employee A •'. • . 19% below compensation level is unacceptably high s J - l ine or low in comparison to its determined compensation, ✓ , acceptable deviation. +' Thus if the parameters were 10 percent above and below the trend he o and a city's results were as shown in _•M-:market value for employee A Figure 1, a number of individuals' com- N pensation levels are outside of the - " • , - ' range of acceptability. ' A comparison of these individual U employees' compensation levels with Job Evaluation Points their measured market value should Figure 3 10% above give the city additional information on $ -' which to base judgment as to what ' action they need to take. For example, : • . . • 10$ below in Figure 2 employee A's compensation , -•- line from the city is too high relative to the - - job value for the job the person holds. • . -•' , If the measured market value of the x '• ' compensation for the job employee A o holds is lower than the city compen- • ' . - ' Employee B's compensation sation for that ob (marked , ' � � on m /Market value for employee B Figure 2, then employee A's compen- sation is not in reasonable relationship c - with either the "all employee" com - 6 - ' parison or the outside market. Job Evaluation Points In such a situation the city could attempt to: sufficient over a period of time to bring pensation fits within the new trend -line 1) freeze employee A's compensa- his or her compensation within the parameters; lion; parameters; 4) develop a "two- tier" wage sys- 2) give employee A smaller compen- 3) raise the other employees' com- tem for the job classification so that sation increases than other employees pensation so that employee A's com- new hires are paid an amount equal to 30 M att\ 91 Minnesota Cities Figure 4 10% above Rep $ Employee D's/ ,- line market rate - _ Employee D i 10,%- below line Q) Employee C ®'� 41 p i pes Cd - - without - *Employee C's m -• market rate ■ ■ digg 0 Job Evaluation Points the measured market value; Option 3. Several, for example, have 5) ignore the situation. adopted a policy which states, "No Cities appear to be choosing options employee shall be paid more than ten 2 and /or 4. A freeze is unacceptable to percent above the employee's measured many cities. Option 3 is often too costly market worth regardless of the employ - and would raise many employees to ee's job evaluation/compensation com- compensation levels unacceptable to parison with other employees." the city's citizens /taxpayers /busi- This article cannot exhaustively dis- nesses. Option 5 obviously is not a cuss all of the possible situations which pragmatic solution. would appear to call for decisions on In Figure 3 employee B's compen- individual employees' compensation 4 sation is lower than that justified by the levels. An employee's compensation _ value of the job the employee holds. may, for example, fit within the defined However, employee B's compensation parameters but have a market value far 0 is justified based on the job's measured in excess of or below the parameters outside market value. (see Figure 4 for examples). In such a situation the city could: The 1984 Comparable Worth Law 1) raise employee B's compensation does not prescribe solutions to cities' so that it fits within the defined param- compensation issues. The law requires eters; cities to establish reasonable compen - 2) give employee B an increase in sation relationships. A city, under the compensation slightly more than the law, has great latitude to determine: increases for employees whose current what constitutes a reasonable compen - compensation is justified by both rela- sation relationship subject to review by five job value and measured market the courts and to bargaining and /or value; arbitration if employees are unionized. 3) define a policy as to whether the Cities would be well advised to city will pay any employee more than spend the time and effort required to Cities all over America are dis- an employee's market value (and if so, make rational and defensible decisions covering that Insituform is the how much); concerning their compensation goals answerto deteriorating pipe 4) ignore the situation. under the law. ■ problems. Detroit, St. Louis, Many cities appear to be choosing Washington, D.C., Baltimore, New Orleans, Seattle, Jacksonville, and dozens of other cities have used the Insituform process to reconstruct crumbling sewers and other pipeline systems without SCHOELL S MADSON, INC. excavation. Insituform is non- ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS disruptive, cost - effective, clean, SOIL TESTING fast and in many cases, stronger • Studies, Presentations, Plans than the original pipe. For more Streets G Highways information, write or call today. Sanitary Systems— Callsction, Pumping, : ve Drainage Works M Water SProduction � Construction Inspection /Management Di at Systems r age , Treatment, Surying— Soundariss, Topog's a Con ads Storage Schosll CC Madson, Inc. h provided cities with complete municipal ipal engineering service for PS years i CENTRAL, INC. 10550 WAYAZATA BLVD. • MWNETONKA. MN 55 -'343 • I6'12I 54B -76p'I 4510 West 77th St. Suite 100 Edina, MN 55435 (612) 835 -1006 March 1987 31 Labor relations Cy Smythe Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part VI This series of articles has examined the inconsistencies of the state's 1984 Comparable Worth Law and discussed various approaches a city might use to Figure 1 10% above meet the law's basic mandate to estab- $ - line fish reasonable compensation relation- . • 10$-below ships between all employee groups. line Parts IV and V of this series described the process of developing an °' • , �� ' • i "all- employee" trend line with 10 per- a cent plus and minus deviation parame- ✓ • . ters. (See Figure 1 for an example of M the lines.) Superimposing employees' labor i• !�/ market values on this diagram could e give the city an indication of whether it �C needs to make any equity adjustments Job Evaluation points in employees' compensation. Following these steps, a city should many years, but which they must now earn overtime pay. When the manage- make another set of calculations if it address. The problem is easily recog- ment employees perceive that they wishes to develop a defensible niz able — non-management individuals work the same and/or more hours than employee compensation system. Cities receiving more pay for a week's work those they supervise, and yet earn less need to take into account the overtime than management employees who compensation than they believe their pay requirements that the federal Fair supervise them and who worked the higher job value /market warrants, they Labor Standards Act (FLSA) imposed same or a greater number of hours in have two effective options available: on cities on April 15, 1986. Under this the same period. 1. join unions and attempt to bargain legislation cities must pay overtime to A relatively common situation is the higher compensation levels and /or go non- exempt employees. This new followin g — employees requirement more sharply brings into P oyees work more than to arbitration to gain higher compensa- re us one compensation problem which 40 hours and receive overtime pay, yet tion levels. Cities should bear in mind supervisors and management employ- that public management employees cities have not effectively dealt with for ees who work the same number of have the right to unionize and the same hours receive no overtime pay. At the rights to arbitration as essential (fire end of the month or year the non- and police) employees. management employees, with a lower 2. File a lawsuit after August 1, 1987 HOEMES &GRAVEN job value and market value than the alleging unreasonable compensation management employees, earn higher relationships based on job value. Chartered compensation than the management Of the two options, unionization Attorneys at taw employees. would be the more effective. Arbitra- Practicing primarily in the areas of This situation has never been tors would generally be expected to rational or defensible. However, under assure management employees under • Municipal Financing' the Comparable Worth Law the situa- the Comparable Worth Law that their • Tax Increment Financing tion is wholly incompatible with the total compensation is reasonable rela- Analysis basic requirements of the act and tive to the compensation, including • General Government demands that the city take action for overtime pay earned by non- manage- two reasons. ment employees. • Litigation One, the Comparable Worth Law Future parts of this series will dis- • Condemnation has focused the attention of all employ - cuss methods of developing a total • Computer Law ees on compensation with a depth and compensation system which could meet intensity not previously seen. the requirements of the Comparable 470 Pillsbury Center Two, management employees will be Worth Law and deal with the realities Minneapolis, MN 55402 less rely in the future to continue to of the Fair Labor Standards Act and (612) 338 -1177 accept earning less total compensation the right of management employees to ' Listed in Bond Buyer's Directory than non - management employees who unionization/arbitration. ■ 28 pr i I M Minnesota Cities I i i Labor relations Cy Smythe I Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part VII i Part VI of this series indicated that 1 cities should address a common prob- Figure 1 lem of compensation inequity between 10% above I management and non - management $ line f employees. The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which now ; - 10% below applies to cities, has brought this ineq- line uity to light. The FLSA took effect in 1 April 1986. Management employees often work ° / the same number or more hours than non - management employees. The man- r agement employees receive their nor- E mal salary regardless of the number of U hours they work beyond 40 per week. Jab Evaluation Points I The non - management employees must receive under FLSA additional pay at Figure 2 time- and - one -half for each hour worked over 40 hours per week. Non - Management Jobs Management Jobs - - 10% above Assume a city where the average $ line non- management employees work 44 .' X 10% below j hours per week and the management line { employees also average 44 hours of i work per week. The non - management I employee group gets paid for four additional hours per week at one and - one -half times their regular rate of pay. The management employee group receives no additional pay. ' Such a situation compresses the compensation differences between the Job Evaluation Points two groups and may create a compen- sation inequity under the state's com- One method of avoiding such com- readily visualize the additional compen- parable worth law. If management pensation inequity is to break the "all sation necessary to remedy the ineq- employees with higher job values and employee" trend line between the non - uity. The new "all employee line" higher market values than non - manage- management and management jobs would appear as in Figure 2. f ment employees receive less total com- based on the degree of the compensa- This is only one method which shows pensation and /or an inadequate tion inequity the overtime pay eligibility or measures the magnitude of the differential in total compensation than creates. Thus the "all employee" inequity. Of importance is not the they believe is warranted by the rela- trend line with 10 percent plus and method but the measurement of the tive job value /market value differences minus deviation parameters, Figure 1, inequity so that the city can develop a (while working the same number of could change to take into account the compensation program to avoid giving hours per week), the management average number of hours the non - the management group an incentive to employees may consider the employer management and management use either court decisions and /or union- as violating the Comparable Worth employee groups work. If the non - ization/arbitration decisions to address Law. They may seek redress through management and management groups a perceived inequity under the Compa- the courts (after August 1, 1987) or both work an average of 40 hours or rable Worth Law. through unionization and bargaining/ 10 percent more hours than the FLSA Part VIII of this series will explore arbitration (arbitration is mandatory for 40 -hour standard, the employer can alternatives to rectifying this compen- contract disputes with supervisory/ break the "all employee line" to reflect sation problem. ■ management employee groups). that percentage. The city can then May R57 Minnesota Cities Labor relations C Sm Y Yffie Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part VIII Parts VI and V1I of this series of plus -or -minus deviation corridor has need to pay management an additional articles centered on the compensation increased relative to the results in 15 percent of base pay, such additional inequities which have commonly Figure 1. compensation would appear to be justi- existed between non - management and Another approach would be a simple fied assuming the employee's market management work groups in terms of examination of the average hours the wage value was equal to or more than relative job value. The Supreme non - management and management the employee's existing wage. Court's imposition of overtime pay groups work. If the non - management Cities should bear in mind that the requirements for non - management group works and gets paid for an average 1984 Comparable Worth Law does not employees under the Fair Labor Stand - 44 hours a week (40 hours at straight require them to establish specific com- ards Act may have worsened these time and four hours at time- and -a -half) pensation relationships based on rela- historic inequities. and the management group works an five job values; rather, the law states Since job evaluation systems typi- average of 44 hours or more a week, "reasonable compensation relation - cally do not address the issue of eligi that translates to a 15 percent discrep- ships." The definition of "reasonable" bility for overtime pay in determining ancy in pay based on hours worked— is left to the city and the courts for job values, cities must deal with the four additional hours on a base of 40 non - unionized employees, and to the matter after they have derived the job hours would be 10 rcent, and time- city, the unions and arbitrators for Pe tY, , values. and -a -half makes it 15 percent. unionized employees. ■ If the city has used one of the While a city wouldn't necessarily generally available computer programs to derive its "all employee" trend line, that will usually resemble the one to Figure 1 Figure 1. $ One method of determining whether x a compensation inequity exists between a non - management and management x employee groups based on hours X x x x worked and overtime compensation, is x x x to "break" and redraw the all- Q x x employee trend line. Such a break a x x x x X x x would look as shown in Figure 2. Q x In Figure 2, the number of manage- x ment employees below the 10- percent x X Job Evaluation Points HOLMES & GRAVEN Chartered Figure 2 Attorneys at Law Non- Management Jobs Managements Practicing primarily in the areas of / • Municipal Financing* $ X • Tax Increment Financing x x - X Analysis i a • General Government x a x x a • Litigation x x X x x • Condemnation x x x x X x x x • Computer Law x 470 Pillsbury Center x x Minneapolis, MN 55402 a (612) 338 -1177 Job Evaluation Points ' Listed in Bond Buyer's Directory 40 TuA e t9 Minnesota Cities Labor relations � y Sm y th e Comparable worth: Determining compensation inequities, Part IX (summary) This series of articles on comparable which compare wages paid with job 5) Developing a wage scale (starting worth has indicated that many cities values, to visually diagram these rela- rate to top rate) for each job classifica- and counties are: tionships. These all- employee lines lion which places the wage scale within 1) Interpreting the requirements of generally appear as shown in Fig. 1. the 10 percent plus -or -minus corridors, the law to mean that compensation 3) Providing for an acceptable 10 provided the to of the scale does not P P P relationships should be reasonable percent plus -or -minus deviation from exceed the market rate for the job by between all employees, male -to -male, the all- employee dollars -to- points line. more than 10 percent. male -to- female, female -to- female. Thus The all- employee lines with the 10 Thus, if the market rate for a job they are not comparing male to female percent plus -or -minus corridor appear averages $7.00 per hour, the top of the employees, but rather all employees to as shown in Fig. 2. city's scale for the job will not exceed all employees. 4) Measuring the market value for $7.70 even if the bottom of the lower 2) Drawing "all employee" pay lines each job classification. 10 percent corridor line is $8.00. The FSg "re , resulting wage diagram would appear = as in Fig. 3. 6) Giving minimal increases or no .__ _ _ = increases to jobs which already pay more than can be justified on the basis of the all- employee line and 10 percent plus /minus corridors or the outside market value. = 7) Attempting to recognize and fur- ther adjust the compensation of exempt doe s,•,",_,°° Po,°te employees (employees not eligible for overtime pay) relative to the pay of Figure 2 all _91.Yea Una non exempt employees (who are eligi 1°: Plat' _ _ '°' .,°•• 11 °a 11 °a ble for overtime pay). 8) Recognizing that the determinates _ of compensation for public employees = in Minnesota have been irrevocably and completely changed by the state's 1984 = Comparable Worth Law and 1986 cov- erage by the federal Fair Labor Stand- _ ards Act. Local government also recognizes that the Public Employment do0 ` P o i nts Labor Relations Act requires negotia- tion /arbitration of compensation for unionized employee groups. While local government employers may be tempted to try to develop a "magic box" solution to the many P roVl map decisions which must be made, there is no magic solution which is a reasonable services fesr or substitute for analysis of data obtained from periodic job evaluation updates and the maintenance of current market municip es. data. Based on this information and consideration of other relevant eco- nomic variables, you can make a ARKHURD rational approach to the development of "reasonable relationships". 345 Pennsylvania Avenue South . Minneapolis, Minnesota 55426 (612} 545 -2583 • Telex 290 -474 34 Minnesota Cities Replace old ppes i without $ Figure 3 digging. higher rate structure based on market comparison top: start: N 3y O top rate L top rtiag a lower rate structure .. -rate start basetl on market comparison Job Evaluation Points i 1 Figure 4 $ o.o N minimal tncreas o no increase c s a Job Evaluation Points Cities allover America are dis- covering that Insituform is the GRANNIS GRANNIS FA answems. Detroit, S t . L pipe RRELL problems e o , St Louis, & KNUTSON, P.A. Washington, D.C., Baltimore, New Orleans, Seattle, Jacksonville, ATTORNEYS AT LAW and dozens of other cities have used the I nsituform process to REPRESENTING AND ADVISING CITIES reconstruct crumbling sewers and IN THE AREAS OF: other pipeline systems without • Zoning, Planning and • Prosecution excavation. Insituform is non - Development • Labor and Personnel disruptive, cost - effective, clean, • Public Improvements • Litigation fast, and in many cases, stronger • Special Assessments • General Government than the original pipe. For more information, write or call today. and • Real Estate tion Condemna 9 1 tion _ 403 Norwest Bank Building ' 161 North Concord Exchange South St. Paul, MN 55075 CENTRAL, INC. (612) 455 -1661 4510 West 77th St. Suite 100 Contact: Roger N. Knutson Edina. MN 55435 (612) 835 -1006 Ju1y 1987 35 (AAPC7CP) 1 PNMPM M ----------------------------------------- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN ----------------------------------------- % -I-- , &I Adopted: December 22, 1986 Resolution No. 86 -202 Amended: ZT U 4.l % 3 1 9 27 Resolution No. 87- �^ RR 3 U (AAPC7TC) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN --------------------------- ---------- ------------------------------- - - - - -- TABLE OF CONTENTS --------------- -- Contents Schedule Page --------------------------------------- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- - - -- Positions Authorized A 1 -2 Executive Pay Plan B 3 Executive Pay Plan Conversion Schedule B -1 4 Executive Positions ons Salary Maximums B -2 '- 5 Supervisory- Professional Pay Plan C 6 Supervisory- Professional Monthly Salary Schedule C -1 7 Supervisory - Professional Conversion Schedule C -2 8 Technical- Secretarial Pay Plan D 9 Technical- Secretarial Hourly Wage Schedule D -1 10 Technical - Secretarial Conversion Schedule D -2 11 Police Officers Pay Plan E 12 Local No. 49 Pay Plan F 13 Liquor Stores Part -Time Employee Pay Plan G 14. Employee Insurance Benefits H 15 City Manager Compensation Agreement I 16 -17 Personnel Expense Reimbursement Policy J 18 -19 (AAPC7A) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 198 OUP I PLAN SCHEDULE A PERMANENT FULL -TIME AND SALARIED PART -TIME POSITIONS AUTHORIZED POSITIONS AUTHORIZED ------------------------- - - - - -- $ — —'- ------------------------------------------------ POSITIONS EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONAL AUTHOR- ORGAN- FROM SALARY UNIT POSITION AUTHOR- IZED OVERTIME SCHEDULE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE: — ------------------------------------ FFICE ------------ --------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - -- City Manager 1 No Yes -Exc B Personnel Coordinator 1 No Yes -Adm C H.R.A. Coordinator 1 No Yes -Adm C City Clerk 1 No Yes -Adm C Administrative Aid 1 No Yes -Adm C Administration /Licenses Secretary 1 No No D Administration /Elections Secretary 1 No ,No D Receptionist 1 No No D --------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- SESSING DEPARTMENT: Assessor Appraiser II 1 No Yes -Exc B 1 No Yes -Aden C Assessment Technician 2 No No D ------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- FINANCE DEPART- ENT Director of Finance /City Treasurer 1 No Yes -Exc B Assistant Director of Finance 1 No Yes -Aden C Staff Accountant 1 No Yes -Adm C Payroll Technician 1 No No D Utilities Technician 1 No No D Accounting Technician 1 No No D Finance Secretary 1 No No D Data Entry Operator 1 No No D ---------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS DIVISION: Maintenance Supervisor 1 No Yes -Adm - C Maintenance Custodian 1 No No D Lead Custodian 1 No No D Custodian 3 No No D POLICE DEPARTMENT. -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Chief /Civil Defense Coordinator 1 No Yes -Exc B Captain 2 No Yes -Adm C Sergeant 5 L#82 No E Police Officer 24 L#82 No E Administrative Assistant 1 No Yes -Adm C Office Manager 1 No Yes -Adm C Administrative Aid 1 No Yes -Adm C Code Enforcement Officer 2 No No D Public Safety Dispatcher 6 No No D Police Secretary 1 No No D ---------------------------------------------------------------- PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT: Director of Planning and Inspection 1 No Yes -Exc B Inspector /Building Official 1 No Yes-Adm. C Inspector 1 No Yes -Adm C Planner 1 No Yes -Adm C Planning and Inspection Secretary 1 No No D ------------------------------------------------------------------- -1- % � b v7 1987 Positions Authorized, Schedule A, Continued: ------------------------------------------------ ENGINEERING DIVISION: Director of Public Works 1 No Yes -Exc B City Engineer 1 No Yes-Adm. C Public Works Coordinator 1 No Yes -Adm C Engineering Technician IV 1 No No D Engineering Technician III 4 No No D Engineering Secretary 1 No No D ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STREETS DIVISION: Public Works Superintendent 1 No Yes -Adm C Supervisor of Streets and Parks 1 No No C Maintenance II 11 L #49 No G Mechanic 3 L #49 No G Night Service Person L #49 No G Public Works Dispatcher 1 No No D ----------------------------------- - - - - - -- - -------------------------------- PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT: 0 Director of Recreat' n 1 No Yes -Exc B Program Supervis 2 No Yes -Adm C Supervisor o 1 No No C Aquatics Sup 1 No Yes -Adm C Maintenance I 7 L #49 No G Parks and Recr on cretary 1 No No D --- - - - - -- --------------------------------------------------------------- MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE: Golf Course Manager 1 No Yes -Adm C PUBLIC UTILITIES DIVISION: Supervisor of Public Utilities 1 No No C Maintenance II 6 L#49 No G ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LIQUOR STORES DEPARTMENT: Liquor Stores Manager 1 No Yes -Exc B Supervisor, Retail 2 No Yes -Aden C ----------------------------------------------- ------------------==- - - - - -- TOTAL PERMANENT FULL -TIME POSITIONS AUTHORIZED: 126 SCHEDULED PART -TIME POSITIONS AUTHORIZED: ---------------------------------------- FIRE DEPARTMENT: Chief 1 No Yes -Vol C Assistant Chief 1 No Yes -Vol C Secretary 1 No Yes -Vol C Fire Marshal 1 No Yes -Vol C Senior Training Officer 1 No Yes -Vol C Training Officer 1 No Yes -Vol C Fire Inspector, Days 1 No Yes -Vol C Fire Inspector 4 No Yes -Vol C Fire Education Officer 1 No Yes -Vol C ------------------------------------------------------------------ LIQUOR STORES DEPARTMENT Clerk /Stocker As Needed No Nor H Cashier As Needed No No H Cashier /Office Assistant 1 No No H (AAPC7B) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE B EXECUTIVE POSITIONS ANNUAL SALARY SCHEDULE EXECUTIVE PLAN *----------------------------------- - - - - -- .- ------------------------------------------ - - - - -- - % 7 -------------------------------------- RANGE I RANGE II RANGE III GROWTH PERFORMANCE MERIT ---------- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - --- --------------- - POSITION MIMIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MIDPOINT MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM --------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- City Manager $ 55,971 $ 62,556 $ 63,215 $ 65,849 $ 69,141 $ 69,800 $ 75,726 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Director of Public Works $ 45,865 $ 51,261 $ 51,800 $ 53,959 $ 56,657 $ 57,196 $ 62,052 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Director of Finance/ City Treasurer $ 42,645 $ 47,662 $ 48,164 $ 50,171 $ 52,679 $ 53,181 $ 57,696 Chief of Police $ 41,538 $ 46,425 $ 46 $ 48,869 $ 51,312 $ 51,801 $ 56,199 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Director of Recreation $ 37,442 $ 41,847 $ 42,288 $ 44,050 $ 46,252 $ 46,693 $ 50,657 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Director of Planning and Inspection $ 37,040 $ 41,398 $ 41,834 $ 43,577 $ 45,756 $ 46,192 $ 50,114 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ City Assessor $ 35,500 $ 39,676 $ 40,094 $ 41,764 $ 43,853 $ 44,270 $ 48,029 ----------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- iquor Stores Manager $ 31,661 $ 35,386 $ 35,759 $ 37,249 $ 39,111 $ 39,484 $ 42,836 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ INTERVALS: Each range has a spread of approximately 35% from minimum to maximum. The minimum is approximately 85% and the maximum is approximately 115% of the midpoint. SALARY RANGES: I: GROWTH RANGE. The lower range (approximately 85% to 95% of the midpoint) should normally include relatively inexperienced employees, as well as those whose performance remains below fully satisfactory levels. II. PERFORMANCE RANGE: The middle range (approximately 96% to 105% of the midpoint) should include the normally experienced, fully satisfactory employees and represent the established "going- rates ". III. MERIT RANGE. The top range (approximately 106% to 115% of the midpoint) should include only those employees who have demonstrated superior performance over a significant period on the job or at comparable levels of responsibility. SALARY SETTING AUTHORITY: The City Council must approve individual salary adjustments within Merit Range III. Salaries within Growth Range I and Performance Range II may be established by the City Manager. The City Manager is authorized to set salaries below the minimum range when performance or qualifications are less then required for the position. The City Manager's salary is established by the City Council. OVERTIME: These positions are exempt from overtime. -3- U U Q (AAPC7B1) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE B -1 EXECUTIVE POSITIONS ANNUAL SALARY CONVERSION SCHEDULE EXECUTIVE PLAN ----------------------------------- °---------------- CONVERSION ------------------------------- - --��- -� ----- TABLE -------------------------------- - - - - -- - RANGE I RANGE II RANGE III GROWTH PERFORMANCE MERIT ---------- - - - - -- ------------------ - - - - -- ---------------- POSITION MIMIMUM MAXIMUM MINIMUM MIDPOINT MAXIMUM MINIMUM MAXIMUM --------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- City Man Y g An $ 55,971 $ 62,556 $ 63,215 $ 65,849 $ 69,141 $ 69,800 $ 75,726 Monthly: $ 4,664 $ 5,213 $ 5,268 $ 5,487 $ 5,762 $ 5,817 $ 6,311 ------------ - - - - -- Hourly $ 26.806 $ 29.960 $ 30.275 $ 31.537 $ 33.114 $ 33.429 $ 36.267 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Director of Annual: $ 45,865 $ 51,261 $ 51,800 $ 53,959 $ 56,657 $ 57,196 $ 62,052 Public Works Monthly: $ 3,822 $ 4,272 $ 4,317 $ 4, $ 4,721 $ 4,766 $ 5,171 N---------- - - - - -- Hourly: $ 21 .966 $ 24.550 $ 24.809 $ 25.842 $ 27.134 $ 27.393 $ 29.719 ------------------------------------------------------------- Director of Annual: $ 42,645 $ 47,662 $ 48,164 $ 50,171 $ 52,679 $ 53,181 $ 57,696 Finance /City Monthly: $ 3,554 $ 3,972 $ 4,014 $ 4,181 $ 4,390 $ 4,432 $ 4,808 Treasurer Hourly: $ 20.424 22.82 $ 7 $ 23.067 $ 24.028 25.22 25-470 $ 9 2 $ 27,632 7 Chief $ Monthly: $ 3,462 $ 3,869 $ 3,909 $ 4,072 $ 4,276 $ 4,317 $ 4,683 Hourly: $ 19.894 $ 22.234 $ 22.468 $ 23.404 $ 24.575 $ 24.809 $ 26.915 ------------------------------------------- ------ --- - -- Director of Annual. $ 37,442 $ 41, $ 42,288 $ 44,050 - 46, - 46,693 $ 50,657 Recreation Monthly: $ 3,120 $ 3,487 $ 3,524 $ 3,671 $ 3,854 $ 3,891 $ 4,221 -- Hourly: $ 17.932 $ 20.042 $ 20.253 $ 21.097 $ 22.151 $ 22 .362 $ 24.261 Director of Annual: $ 37 $ 41,398 $ 41,834 $ 43,577 $ 45,756 $ 46,192 $ 50,114 Planning and Monthly: $ 3,087 $ 3,450 $ 3,486 $ 3,631 $ 3,813 $ 3,849 $ 4,176 - Inspection Hourly: $ 17.740 $ 19.827 $ 20.035 $ 20.870 $ 21.914 $ 22.122 $ 24.001 ----------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- City Assessor Annual: $ 35,500 $ 39,676 $ 40,094 $ 41,764 $ 43,853 $ 44,270 =$ 48,029 Monthly: $ 2,958 $ 3,306 $ 3,341 $ 3,480 $ 3,654 $ 3,689 $ 4,002 Hourly: $ 17.002 $ 19.002 $ 19.202 $ 20.002 $ 21.002 $ 21.202 $ 23.002 --------------------------- - - - - -- ------------------------------------ Liquor Stores Annual. $ 31,661 $ 35,386 $ 35,759 $ 37,249 $ 39,111 $ 39,484 $ 42,836 Manager Monthly: $ 2,638 $ 2,949 $ 2,980 $ 3,104 $ 3,259 $ 3,290 $ 3,570 Hourly: $ 15.163 $ 16.947 $ 17.126 $ 17.839 $ 18.731 $ 18.910 $ 20.515 ---------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: The Executive positions are classified as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and are compensated at an annual salary. This schedule converts the annual salary to a monthly salary by dividing the annual salary by twelve months. The schedule converts the annual salary to an hourly equivalent Y q by dividing the annual salary by the normal work hours in the current year. The number of normal work hours is determined by subtracting Saturdays and Sundays from the total number of days in the year and multiplying that number by eight hours. There are 2,088 normal work hours in 1987. This conversion schedule is for informational purposes only and is not an official wage schedule. -4- Mwp w (AAPC7B2) D CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE B -2 EXECUTIVE POSITIONS 1987 MAXIMUM ANNUAL SALARIES ESTABLISHED EXECUTIVE POSITIONS ------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- 1987 ANNUAL SALARY MAXIMUMS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ IN ADDITION TO THE SALARY SETTING AUTHORITY GRANTED THE CITY MANAGER IN EXECUTIVE PLAN SCHEDULE B TO SET SALARIES IN GROWTH RANGE I AND PERFORMANCE RANGE II THE CITY MANAGER IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO SET INDIVIDUAL SALARIES WITHIN MERIT RA T RANGE III DURING YEAR 1987 TO THE MAXIMUM SALARIES SHOWN IN THIS SCHEDULE. THE CALENDAR -----------------------------------------------------------------=---- CONVERSION TABLE -------------------- MAXIMUM MONTHLY HOURLY POSITION ANNUAL SALARY EQUIVALENT EQUIVALEN" ------- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- Director of Public Works $ 57,791 $ 4,816 $ 27.678 --------------------------------------- - - - - -- - -- Director of Finance/ City Treasurer $ 54 $ 4 26.2 Chief -of- Police----------------------------------- - - - - -$ 53 365 ----- - - - - - 4, 43 7 $ 25 .558 558 - $ 7 $ 25 ------------------ - - - -� 3,727 $ 21.422 - -- - City Assessor $ 44,730 -------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- ------------7----------------------------------- NOTE: The Executive positions are classified as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and are compensated at an annual salary. This schedule also converts the annual salary to monthly and hourly. The conversions are for informational purposes only and are not a part of the official wage schedule. -5- - (AAPC7C) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITI$PN D 1 PLAN SCHEDULE C SUPERVISORY AND PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS GRADE RANGE AND MONTHLY SALARY SUPERVISORY - --------------------------------------------------------------------- PROFESSIONAL R - %' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GRADE RANGE MONTHLY SALARY RANGE FROM SCHEDULE C -1 FROM SCHEDULE C-1 ------------------- - - - - -- ------------------ - - - - -- EXEMPT GOING GOING FROM POSITION MINIMUM RATE MAXIMUM MINIMUM RATE MAXIMUM OVERTIME ----- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- City Engineer S35A S37C S39C $ 3,288 $ 3,808 $ 4,001 Yes Police Captain S32A S34C S36C $ 3,053 $ 3,536 $ 3,715 Yes H.R.A. Coordinator S32A S34C S36C $ 3,053 $ 3,536 $ 3,715 Yes Public Works Superintendent S31A S33C 935C $ 2,979 $ 3,450 $ 3,625 Yes Assistant Director of Finance S31A S33C S35C $ 2,979 $ 3,450 $ 3,625 Yes Personnel Coordinator S29A S31C S33C $ 2,835 $ 3,284 $ 3,450 Yes Planner S23A S25C S27C $ 2,445 $ 2,832 $ 2,975 Yes Administrative Assistant, Police S23A S25C S27C $ 2,445 $ 2,832 $ 2,975 Yes Inspector /Building Official S22A S24C S26C $ 2,385 $ 2,763 $ 2,902 Yes Staff Accountant S22A S24C S26C $ 2,385 $ 2,763 $ 2,902 Yes Public Works Coordinator S21A S23C S25C $ 2,327 $ 2,695 $ 2,832 Yes City Clerk S21A S23C S25C $ 2,327 $ 2,695 $ 2,832 Yes Office Manager, Police S21A S23C S25C $ 2,327 $ 2,695 $ 2,832 Yes Supervisor of Streets and Parks S20A S22C S24C $ 2,270 $ 2,630 $ 2,763 No Supervisor of Public Utilities S20A S22C S24C $ 2,270 $ 2,630 $ 2,763 No Golf Course Manager S20A S22C S24C $ 2,270 $ 2,630 $ 2,763 Yes Program Supervisor, Recreation S20A S22C S24C $ 2,270 $ 2,630 $ 2,763 Yes Appraiser II S19A S21C S23C $ 2,215 $ 2,565 $ 2,695 Yes Inspector, Planning and Inspection S18A S20C S22C $ 2,161 $ 2,503 $ 2,630 Yes Maintenance Supervisor S16A S18C S20C $ 2,057 $ 2,382 $ 2,503 Yes Administrative Aid, Police S11A S13C S15C $ 1,818 $ 2,106 $ 2,212 Yes Supervisor, Liquor Retail S8A S10C S12C $ 1,688 $ 1,955 $ 2,054 Yes Aquatics Supervisor S8A S10C S12C $ 1,688 $ 1,955 $ 2,054 Yes Administrative Aid, City Manager's Office S8A S10C S12C $ 1,688 $ 1,955 $ 2,054 Yes Fire Chief (Part- time) $ 645 Yes Assistant Chief (Part -time) $ 405 Yes Secretary (Part -time) $ 150 Yes Fire Education Officer (Part -time) $ 150 Yes Fire Marshal (Part -time) $ 405 Yes Senior Training Officer (Part -time) $ 275 Yes Training Officer (Part -time) $ 210 Yes Fire Inspector,Days (Part -time) $ 370 Yes Fire Inspector (Part -time) $ 210 Yes -6- (AAPC7C1) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE C -1 SUPERVISORY - PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PROGRESSION STEPS MERIT STEPS GRADES A B C D E S1 $ 1,420 $ 1,491 $ 1,566 $ 1,644 $ 1,726 S2 $ 1,456 $ 1,528 $ 1,605 $ 1,685 $ 1,769 S3 $ 1,492 $ 1,567 $ 1,645 $ 1,727 $ 1,813 S4 $ 1,529 $ 1,606 $ 1,686 $ 1,770 $ 1,859 S5 $ 1,567 $ 1,646 $ 1,728 $ 1,815 $ 1,905 S6 $ 1,607 $ 1,687 $ 1,771 $ 1,860 $ 1,953 S7 $ 1,647 $ 1,729 $ 1,816 $ 1,906 $ 2,002 S8 $ 1,688 $ 1,772 $ 1,861 $ 1,954 $ 2,052 p S9 $ 1,730 $ 1,817 $ 1,907 $ 2,003 $ 2,103 S10 $ 1,773 $ 1,862 $ 1,955 $ 2,053 $ 2,156 S11 $ 1,818 $ 1,909 $ 2,004 $ 2,104 $ 2,209 S12 $ 1,863 $ 1,956 $ 2,054 $ 2,157 $ 2,265 S13 $ 1,910 $ 2,005 $ 2,106 $ 2,211 $ 2,321 S14 $ 1,958 $ 2,055 $ 2,158 $ 2,266 $ 2,379 S15 $ 2,006 $ 2,107 $ 2,212 $ 2,323 $ 2,439 S16 $ 2,057 $ 2,159 $ 2,267 $ 2,381 $ 2,500 S17 $ 2,108 $ 2,213 $ 2,324 $ 2,440 $ 2,562 S18 $ 2,161 $ 2,269 $ 2,382 $ 2,501 $ 2,626 S19 $ 2,215 $ 2,325 $ 2,442 $ 2,564 $ 2,692 S20 $ 2,270 $ 2,384 $ 2,503 $ 2,628 $ 2,759 S21 $ 2,327 $ 2,443 $ 2,565 $ 2,694 $ 2,828 S22 $ 2,385 $ 2,504 $ 2,630 $ 2,761 $ 2,899 S23 $ 2,445 $ 2,567 $ 2,695 $ 2,830 $ 2,972 S24 $ 2,506 $ 2,631 $ 2,763 $ 2,901 $ 3,046 S25 $ 2,568 $ 2,697 $ 2,832 $ 2,973 $ 3,122 S26 $ 2,633 $ 2,764 $ 2,902 $ 3,048 $ 3,200 S27 $ 2,698 $ 2,833 $ 2,975 $ 3,124 $ 3,280 S28 $ 2,766 $ 2,904 $ 3,049 $ 3,202 $ 3,362 S29 $ 2,835 $ 2,977 $ 3,126 $ 3,282 $ 3,446 S30 $ 2,906 $ 3,051 $ 3,204 $ 3,364 $ 3,532 S31 $ 2,979 $ 3,128 $ 3,284 $ 3,448 $ 3,620 S32 $ 3,053 $ 3,206 $ 3,366 $ 3,534 $ 3,711 S33 $ 3,129 $ 3,286 $ 3,450 $ 3,623 $ 3,804 S34 $ 3,208 $ 3,368 $ 3,536 $ 3,713 $ 3,899 S35 $ 3,288 $ 3,452 $ 3,625 $ 3,806 $ 3,996 S36 $ 3,370 $ 3,538 $ 3,715 $ 3,901 $ 4,096 S37 $ 3,454 $ 3,627 $ 3,808 $ 3,999 $ 4,199 S3 $ 3,541 $ 3,718 $ 3,904 $ 4,099 $ 4,304 S39 $ 3,629 $ 3,811 $ 4,001 $ 4,201 $ 4,411 S40 $ 3,720 $ 3,906 $ 4,101 $ 4,306 $ 4,521 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NORMAL PROGRESSION: A is starting wage. Advance to Step B after six months probationary period. Advance to Step C after eighteen months employment. Additional grade advances in Step C, within the City Council authorized limits shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. CITY MANAGER'S DISCRETION: Starting grade and grade /step advances, within the City Council authorized limits set for each position, shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. The City Manager is authorized to set salaries below the minimum grade range when performance or qualifications are less then required for the position. INTERVALS: Grades 1 through 40 represent 2 1/2% advances. Steps A through E O epresent approximately 5% advances. RIT STEPS: Merit steps shall only be awarded with express approval of the City Council. -7- ilm 'aTnpagos a2pm TuTO ?33 qou sT puu ATuo sasodand Tuuo?quwa0JUT ao3 sT aTnpauos uo?saanuoo s?uZ 'L86L UT sanoq xaoM Tumaou 880`Z aau aaagy •sinoq ggBTa Aq aagrunu qugq ?uTATd ?gTncu puu auaA auq UT sAup 3o aagtunu Tugoq aqq woa3 s�CupunS puu sAupanquS SuTgouagqns �q pauTmaagap CT sanoq >aoM Tuuraou 3o aaqumu aqy 'auaA quaaano aqq UT sanoq >ja0m TEwaou 3o aagwnu aqq �q aqua Tunuuu aqq SuTPTn ?p Aq aqua guaTunTnba 4inoq uu oq AauTus Tunuuu aqq sgaanuoo aTnpagos aqy sgquow anT9m4 Aq aqua ATgquoru aqq �UT Aq guaTun?nba Tunuuu up oq �aPTus ATgguow aqq sgaanuoo aTnpagos sTgy •AauTus ATgquow u qu paqusuadwoo aau puu (VSIZ) goy sPauPuugS aoquu -- - aru,� - aqq aapun gdwaxa su paTJTssETo aau suoTgTsod TuuoTssa3oad - AaosTnaadnS aqy :ZION ----------------- --------------- ----------- --------------- ------------------ 69S'£Z $ Z2`6tt $ LOL `tt $ 8tttt'Z2 $ ZL8`9tt $ 906`£ $ 6L£' LZ $ ott9`trtt $ oZL`£ $ tt66'ZZ $ ZLo`gtt $ L00`tr $ Zo6'LZ $ Z£L`Stt $ LL8 $ 9S8'O $ 8tt5`£tr $ 6Z9`£ $ L£tt'ZZ $ 8tt8`9tt $ tr06`£ $ 29P $ 9L9`tttt $ 8LL`£ $ LS£'OZ $ Z6tt`Ztt $ LttS`£ $ S28' $ 969 ` Stt $ 909 $ Stt8' OZ $ hZS `£tr $ LZ9 `£ $ L S8' 6 L $ 8tttt ` L tt $ ttStt `£ $ LS£' LZ $ 08S`tttt $ SLL`£ $ £££'OZ $ 9Wtz tt $ 8£S`£ $ 89£'6L $ otttt`Ott $ oL£`£ $ ££8'OZ $ 00S`£tt $ SZ9`£ $ 6£8'6L $ ttZtt` Ltt $ ZStt`£ $ L68 $ 9W6£ $ 88Z`£ $ ZZ£'OZ $ Z£tt`Ztr $ 9£S`£ $ 9S£'6L $ gWott $ 89£`£ $ LW9L $ 96t`8£ $ 8oZ`£ $ 8Z8'6L $ oott` Lti $ oStt`£ $ S88'8L $ Z£tr`6£ $ 98Z`£ $ £86'LL $ 9WL£ $ 6ZL `£ $ S4PU $ Z 6Wott $ 99£`£ $ SZtt'8L $ ZLtt`8£ $ 90Z`£ $ 9ttS'LL $ 9£9`9£ $ £SO`£ $ ttL8'8L $ 80t`6£ $ tt9VE $ LL6'LL $ 9£S`L£ $ 8ZL `£ $ 2 L *LL $ W'S£ $ 6L6`Z $ ttLtt'8L $ 8trtt`8£ $ trOZ`£ $ tt£S'LL $ ZL9`9£ $ LSO`£ $ LOL'9L $ ZL8`tt£ $ 906`Z $ 996'LL $ ZLS`L£ $ 9ZL`£ $ 60L'LL $ ttZLP S£ $ LL6`Z $ £6Z'9L $ OZV tt£ $ S£8`Z $ £ZS'LL $ 885`9£ $ 6tt0`£ $ 069'9L $ 8tt8`tt£ $ tt06`Z $ L68•SL $ Z6L`££ $ 99L`Z $ 860'LL $ 00P S£ $ SW O $ Z8Z'gl $ 966 $ ££8`Z $ 90S'SL $ 9L£`Z£ $ 869`Z $ 8L9"9L $ ttZWE $ Z06`0 $ 988'SL $ 89L`££ $ tt9L`Z $ Z£L*SL $ 96S`L£ $ ££9`Z $ 9LZ'9L $ tr86`££ $ z£8`Z $ OOS'SL $ tt9£`Z£ $ L69`Z $ 6SL'ttL $ 9L8`0£ $ 895`Z $ 6L8'SL $ 9SL`££ $ £9L`Z $ LZL'SL $ ZLS`LE $ L£9`Z $ ZOtt'ttL $ ZLO`0£ $ 90S`Z $ 68tt'SL $ Ott£`Z£ $ S69`0 $ £SL'ttl $ tt08`0£ $ L9S`Z $ ZSO'ttl $ Ott£`6Z $ Stttt`Z $ SW SL $ 09S` L£ $ OWO $ L6£'ttL $ 8tt0`0£ $ ttOS`Z $ LOL'£L $ OZ9`8Z $ S8£`Z $ LttL'ttl $ 08L`0£ $ SWZ` $ OttO'ttl $ 9l£`6Z $ £tttt`Z $ ttL£'£L $ ttZ6`LZ $ LZ£`Z $ 58£'ttL $ 9£0`0£ $ £o5 $ loL'£L $ 809`8Z $ tt8£ $ 9tr0'£ $ ottZ $ OLZ $ tt£0'ttl $ t OV6Z $ EWE $ Z9£'£L $ 006`LZ $ SZVzZ $ 0£L'ZL $ o8S`9Z $ SLZ`Z $ o69'£L $ tt85`8Z $ Z8£`Z $ Ot O'£L $ 80Z`LZ $ 69VZz $ OZtt'ZL $ Z£6`SZ $ L9L `Z $ 9S£'£L $ 888`LZ $ ttZ£`Z $ 8LL'ZL $ 95S`9Z $ £LVZ $ SLL'ZL $ 96V SF $ 80L `Z $ 6ZO' $ tto `LZ $ L9Z $ 80tt'ZL $ 806`SZ $ 6Sl $ ZZ8' $ tt89` $ LSO $ £LL'ZL $ tth5`9Z $ ZLZ`Z $ 60L'ZL $ ttgVSZ $ LOL`Z $ 6ZS%L $ ZLo $ 900`Z $ ZOtt'ZL $ 968`SZ $ 8SL `Z $ OL8' l L $ 099`ttZ $ SSO`Z $ £SZ' L L $ 96tt`£Z $ 8S6` L $ £OL'ZL $ ZLZ`SZ $ 90L `Z $ En LL $ 090 ttZ $ Soo `Z $ LL6'OL $ OZ6`ZZ $ OWL $ SO8' L L $ 8tr9 `t ZZ $ ttSO `Z $ L Nt - L L $ ZLtt `£Z $ 9S6 ` L $ LOL' OL $ 9S£ `ZZ $ £98 ` L $ LLS'lL $ 8tt0`ttZ $ ttoo`Z $ LL6'OL $ 806`Z2 $ 606`L $ 8ttt*OL $ %9 $ 8L8`L $ 9£Z' l L $ 09tt `£Z $ SS6 ` L $ L OL' O L $ t7tt£ `ZZ $ Z98 ` L $ 06l ' O L $ 9LZ ` L Z $ £LL ` L $ 096'OL $ tt88`Z2 $ L06`L $ £tttt'OL $ tto8`LZ $ LL9 $ £tt6'6 $ OgPozZ $ 0£L`L $ S69'OL $ Z££`ZZ $ L98` L $ ttWOL $ tt9V 2 $ ZLP L $ LOL•6 $ gSZ`oZ $ 999 $ LWOL $ Z6P $ 9L8`L $ L£6'6 $ 2W2 $ 6ZL`l $ 99tt•6 $ ttWft $ Ltg'L $ 8L L ' O L $ ZSZ ` L Z $ L LP L $ S69' 6 $ ttttV oZ $ L89 ` L $ 9£Z' 6 $ tt8V 6 L $ L09 ` l $ L£6'6 $ 9£L`OZ $ 8ZL`L $ 09tt•6 $ ZSL`6L $ gtt9`L $ 900'6 $ tt08 $ L95`L $ 069 $ Z£Z`OZ $ 989`L $ o£Z'6 $ ZLZ`6L $ 9o9`L $ LW 9 $ 8tt£`8L $ 6ZS`L $ hStt•6 $ OW6L $ Stt9` l $ 900'6 $ tt08`8L $ L9S` l $ SLS'8 $ tt06`LL $ Z6W l $ ttZZ'6 $ 09Z`6L $ So9`L $ Z8L'8 $ 9££ $ 8ZS`L $ 89£'8 $ ZLtt`Ll $ 95tt`L $ 000'6 $ Z6L`8L $ 99S`L $ 69S'8 $ Z68`LL $ LWL $ L%19 $ M $ OZtt`L $ X'MflOH 'IVfINNV X'IHZNOW 7,'IUf10H 'IVf1NNV )'TUNOW A'IHfIOH 'lVfINNV A'IHZNOW ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hu01 NOISaEANO0 LIZ— I r EIVE X IHINOW H'IIlQHHOS NOIS"dEAN00 7,gV ISIS 7,gHINOW SNOIZISOd UNOISSE20ad - XLIOSIMEdnS Z H'InGEHOS NV 3 70 Y NO H L U720089 so x1io (ZOLOdVV) a a� • • 1] (AAPC7D) D D U CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE D TECHNICAL AND SECRETARIAL POSITIONS GRADE RANGE AND HOURLY RATES TECHNICAL - SECRETARIAL % -1- %9 PLAN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GRADE RANGE HOURLY WAGE RANGE FROM SCHEDULE D -1 FROM SCHEDULE D -1 ------------------- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - -- GOING GOING POSITION MINIMUM RATE MAXIMUM MINIMUM RATE MAXIMUM ------------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - -- Engineering Technician IV T37A T39C T41C $ 14.35 $ 16.62 $ 17.46 --------------------------------------------------------------- Engineering Technician III T27A T29C T31C $ 11.21 $ 12.99 $ 13.64 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Maintenance Custodian T24A T26C T28C $ 10.41 $ 12.06 $ 12.67 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Lead Custodian T20A T22C T24C $ 9.43 $ 10.92 $ 11.48 --------------------------------------------------------------- Public Works Dispatcher T19A T21C T23C $ 9.20 $ 10.66 $ 11.20 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Payroll Technician T19A T21C T23C $ 9.20 $ 10.66 $ 11.20 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Public Safety Dispatcher T19A T21C T23C $ 9.20 $ 10.66 $ 11.20 --------------------------------------------------------------- Custodian T17A T19C T21C $ 8.76 $ 10.14 $ 10.66 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assessment Technician T17A T19C T21C $ 8.76 $ 10.14 $ 10.66 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Utilities Technician T17A T19C T21C $ 8.76 $ 10.14 $ 10.66 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Accounting Technician T17A T19C T21C $ 8.76 $ 10.14 $ 10.66 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Code Enforcement Officer T14A T16C T18C $ 8.13 $ 9.42 $ 9.90 ----------------------------T16C T18C - ----- ------- ---- --- - - - - Engineering Secretary T14A 8.1 3 - 9 .42 - 9 90 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Planning and Inspection Secretary T14A T16C T18C $ 8.13 $ 9.42 $ 9.90 Finance Secretary T13A T15C T1 $ 7.93 $ 9.19 - $ -- - C 7 9.66 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Data Entry Operator T13A T15C T17C $ 7.93 $ 9.19 $ 9.66 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Administration /Licenses Secretary T13A T15C T17C $ 7.93 $ 9.19 $ 9.66 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Police Secretary T13A T15C T17C $ 7.93 $ 9.19 $ 9.66 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Parks and Recreation Secretary T13A T15C T17C $ 7.93 $ 9.19 $ 9.66 -------------------------------------------------------- Administration/Elections Secretary T9A T11C T13C $ 7.19 $ 8.33 $ 8.75 --------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Receptionist T8A T10C T12C $ 7.0.E $ 8.12 $ 8.53 (AAPC7D1) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE D -1 TECHNICAL AND SECRETARIAL POSITIONS HOURLY WAGE SCHEDULE % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PROGRESSION STEPS MERIT STEPS 0 GRADES A B C D E T1 $ 5.90 $ 6.19 $ 6.50 $ 6.83 $ 7.17 T2 $ 6.05 $ 6.35 $ 6.67 $ 7.00 $ 7.35 T3 $ 6.20 $ 6.51 $ 6.83 $ 7.18 $ 7.53 T4 $ 6.35 $ 6.67 $ 7.00 $ 7.35 $ 7.72 T5 $ 6.51 $ 6.84 $ 7.18 $ 7.54 $ 7.92 T6 $ 6.67 $ 7.01 $ 7.36 $ 7.73 $ 8.11 T7 $ 6.84 $ 7.18 $ 7.54 $ 7.92 $ 8.32 T8 $ 7.01 $ 7.36 $ 7.73 $ 8.12 $ 8.52 T9 $ 7.19 $ 7.55 $ 7.92 $ 8.32 $ 8.74 T10 $ 7.37 $ 7.74 $ 8.12 $ 8.53 $ 8.96 T11 $ 7.55 $ 7.93 $ 8.33 $ 8.74 $ 9.18 T12 $ 7.74 $ 8.13 $ 8.53 $ 8.96 $ 9.41 T13 $ 7.93 $ 8.33 $ 8.75 $ 9.18 $ 9.64 T14 $ 8.13 $ 8.54 $ 8.97 $ 9.41 $ 9.89 T15 $ 8.34 $ 8.75 $ 9.19 $ 9.65 $ 10.13 T16 $ 8.54 $ 8.97 $ 9.42 $ 9.89 $ 10.39 T17 $ 8.76 $ 9.20 $ 9.66 $ 10.14 $ 10.65 T18 $ 8.98 $ 9.43 $ 9.90 $ 10.39 $ 10.91 T19 $ 9.20 $ 9.66 $ 10.14 $ 10.65 $ 11.18 T20 $ 9.43 $ 9.90 $ 10.40 $ 10.92 $ 11.46 C.7 T21 $ 9.67 $ 10.15 $ 10.66 $ 11.19 $ 11.75 T22 $ 9.91 $ 10.40 $ 10.92 $ 11.47 $ 12.04 T23 $ 10.16 $ 10.66 $ 11.20 $ 11.76 $ 12.35 C= T24 $ 10.41 $ 10.93 $ 11.48 $ 12.05 $ 12.65 T25 $ 10.67 $ 11.20 $ 11.76 $ 12.35 $ 12.97 T26 $ 10.94 $ 11.48 $ 12.06 $ 12.66 $ 13.29 T27 $ 11.21 $ 11.77 $ 12.36 $ 12.98 $ 13.63 T28 $ 11.49 $ 12.07 $ 12.67 $ 13.30 $ 13.97 T29 $ 11.78 $ 12.37 $ 12.99 $ 13.63 $ 14.32 T30 $ 12.07 $ 12.68 $ 13.31 $ 13.98 $ 14.67 T31 $ 12.37 $ 12.99 $ 13.64 $ 14.33 $ 15.04 T32 $ 12.68 $ 13.32 $ 13.98 $ 14.68 $ 15.42 T33 $ 13.00 $ 13.65 $ 14.33 $ 15.05 $ 15.80 T34 $ 13.33 $ 13.99 $ 14.69 $ 15.43 $ 16.20 T35 $ 13.66 $ 14.34 $ 15.06 $ 15.81 $ 16.60 T36 $ 14.00 $ 14.70 $ 15.44 $ 16.21 $ 17.02 T37 $ 14.35 $ 15.07 $ 15.82 $ 16.61 $ 17.44 T38 $ 14.71 $ 15.44 $ 16.22 $ 17.03 $ 17.88 T39 $ 15.08 $ 15.83 $ 16.62 $ 17.45 $ 18.33 T40 $ 15.45 $ 16.23 $ 17.04 $ 17.89 $ 18.78 T41 $ 15.84 $ 16.63 $ 17.46 $ 18.34 $ 19.25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NORMAL PROGRESSION: A is starting wage. Advance to Step B after six months probationary period. Advance to Step C after eighteen months employment. Additional grade advances in Step C, within the City Council authorized limits, shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. CITY MANAGER'S DISCRETION: Starting grade and grade /step advances, within the City Council authorized limits set for each position, shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. The City Manager is authorized to set salaries below the minimum grade range when performance or qualifications are less then required for the position. NTERVALS: Grades 1 through 40 represent 2 112% advances. Steps A through E epresent approximately 5% advances. MERIT STEPS: Merit steps shall only be awarded with express approval of the City Council. -10- (AAPC7D2) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENT 19 TI ION D N PLAN SCHEDULE D -2 TECHNICAL AND SECRETARIAL POSITIONS HOURLY RATE CONVERSION SCHEDULE HOURLY RATE CONVERSION TABLE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HOURLY ANNUAL MONTHLY HOURLY ANNUAL MONTHLY HOURLY ANNUAL MONTHLY --- - - - --- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- $ 5.90 $ 12,319 $ 1,027 $ 6.19 $ 12,925 $ 1,077 $ 6.50 $ 13,572 $ 1,131 $ 6.05 $ 12,632 $ 1,053 $ 6.35 $ 13,259 $ 1 $ 6.67 $ 13,927 $ 1,161 $ 6.20 $ 12,946 $ 1,079 $ 6.51 $ 13,593 $ 1,133 $ 6.83 $ 14,261 $ 1,188 $ 6.35 $ 13,259 $ 1,105 $ 6.67 $ 13,927 $ 1,161 $ 7.00 $ 14,616 $ 1,218 $ 6.51 $ 13,593 $ 1,133 $ 6.84 $ 14,282 $ 1,190 $ 7.18 $ 14,992 $ 1,249 $ 6.67 $ 13,927 $' 1,161 $ 7.01 $ 14,637 $ 1,220 $ 7.36 $ 15,368 $ 1,281 $ 6.84 $ 14,282 $ 1,190 $ 7.18 $ 14,992 $ 1,249 $ 7.54 $ 15,744 $ 1,312 $ 7.01 $ 14,637 $ 1,220 $ 7.36 $ 15,368 $ 1,281 $ 7.73 $ 16,140 $ 1,345 $ 7.19 $ 15,013 $ 1,251 $ 7.55 $ 15,764 $ 1 $ 7.92 $ 16,537 $ 1,378 $ 7.37 $ 15,389 $ 1,282 $ 7.74 $ 16 $ 1,347 $ 8.12 $ 16,955 $ 1,413 $ 7.55 $ 15,764 $ 1,314 $ 7.93 $ 16,558 $ 1,380 $ 8.33 $ 17,393 $ 1,449 $ 7.74 $ 16,161 $ 1,347 $ 8.13 $ 16,975 $ 1,415 $ 8.53 $ 17,811 $ 1,484 $ 7.93 $ 16,558 $ 1,380 $ 8.33 $ 17,393 $ 1,449 $ 8.75 $ 18,270 $ 1,523 $ 8.13 $ 16,975 $ 1,415 $ 8.54 $ 17,832 $ 1,486 $ 8.97 $ 18,729 $ 1,561 $ 8.34 $ 17,414 $ 1,451 $ 8.75 $ 18,270 $ 1,523 $ 9.19 $ 19,189 $ 1,599 $ 8.54 $ 17,832 $ 1,486 $ 8.97 $ 18,729 $ 1,561 $ 9.42 $ 19,669 $ 1,639 $ 8.76 $ 18,291 $ 1,524 $ 9.20 $ 19,210 $ 1,601 $ 9.66 $ 20,170 $ 1,681 $ 8.98 $ 18,750 $ 1,563 $ 9.43 $ 19,690 $ 1,641 $ 9.90 $ 20,671 $ 1,723 $ 9.20 $ 19,210 $ 1,601 $ 9.66 $ 20,170 $ 1,681 $ 10.14 $ 21,172 $ 1,764 $ 9.43 $ 19,690 $ 1,641 $ 9.90 $ 20,671 $ 1,723 $ 10.40 $ 21,715 $ 1,810 $ 9.67 $ 20,191 $ 1,683 $ 10.15 $ 21,193 $ 1,766 $ 10.66 $ 22,258 $ 1,855 $ 9.91 $ 20,692 $ 24 $ ,7 $ 10.40 $ 21,715 $ 1,810 $ 13.92 $ 29,065 $ 2,422 $ 10.16 $ 21,214 $ 1,768 $ 10.66 $ 22,258 $ 1,855 $ 11.20 $ 23,386 $ 1,949 $ 10.41 $ 21,736 $ 1,811 $ 10.93 $ 22,822 $ 1,902 $ 11.48 $ 23,970 $ 1,998 $ 10.67 $ 22,279 $ 1,857 $ 11.20 $ 23,386 $ 1,949 $ 11.76 $ 24,555 $ 2,046 $ 10.94 $ 22,843 $ 1,904 $ 11.48 $ 23,970 $ 1,998 $ 12.06 $ 25,181 $ 2,098 $ 11.21 $ 23,406 $ 1,951 $ 11.77 $ 24,576 $ 2,048 $ 12.36 $ 25,808 $ 2 $ 11.49 $ 23,991 $ 1,999 $ 12.07 $ 25,202 $ 2,100 $ 12.67 $ 26,455 $ 2,205 $ 11.78 $ 24,597 $ 2,050 $ 12.37 $ 25,829 $ 2,152 $ 12.99 $ 27,123 $ 2,260 $ 12.07 $ 25,202 $ 2,100 $ 12.68 $ 26,476 $ 2,206 $ 13.31 $ 27,791 $ 2,316 $ 12.37 $ 25,829 $ 2 $ 12.99 $ 27,123 $ 2,260 $ 13.64 $ 28,480 $ 2,373 $ 12.68 $ 26,476 $ 2 $ 13.32 $ 27,812 $ 2,318 $ 13.98 $ 29,19 $ 2,43 $ 13.00 $ 27,144 $ 2,262 $ 13.65 $ 28,501 $ 2,375 $ 14.33 $ 29,921 $ 2,493 $ 13.33 $ 27,833 $ 2,319 $ 13.99 $ 29,211 $ 2,434 $ 14.69 $ 30,673 $ 2,556 $ 13.66 $ 28,522 $ 2,377 $ 14.34 $ 29,942 $ 2,495 $ 15.06 $ 31,445 $ 2,620 $ 14.00 $ 29,232 $ 2,436 $ 14.70 $ 30,694 $ 2,558 $ 15.44 $ 32,239 $ 2,687 $ 14.35 2 6 $ 9,9 3 $ 2,497 $ 15.07 $ 31,466 $ 2,622 $ 15.82 $ 33,032 $ 2,753 $ 14.71 $ 30,714 $ 2,560 $ 15.44 $ 32,239 $ 2,687 $ 16.22 $ 33,867 $ 2,822 $ 15.08 $ 31,487 $ 2,624 $ 15.83 $ 33,053 $ 2,754 $ 16.62 $ 34,703 $ 2,892 $ 15.45 $ 32,260 $ 2,688 $ 16.23 $ 33,888 $ 2,824 $ 17.04 $ 35,580 $ 2,965 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NOTE: The Technical and Clerical positions are classified as non - exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and are compensated at an hourly wage rate. This schedule converts the hourly rate to an annual rate by multiplying the hourly rate by the number of normal work hours in the current year. The number of normal work hours is determined by subtracting Saturdays and Sundays from the total number of days in the year and multiplying that number by eight hours. There are 2,088 normal work hours in 1987. The monthly wage is determined by dividing the annual wage by twelve months. This conversion schedule is for informational purposes only and is not an official wage schedule. -11- D PANDASS (AAPC7E) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 19 0 T CATION M PLAN SCHEDULE E POLICE OFFICER POSITIONS HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,L LOCAL NO. 82 POLICE OFFICERS ----------------------- - - - - -- - - - - --- ------ - - - - -- PLAN HOURLY RATE PROGRESSION STEPS P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 POSITION (65 %) (70 %) (80 %) (90 %) (100 %) g "�' �► --------------- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- Police Officer $ 10.016 $ 10.787 $ 12.328 $ 13 .869 $ 15.410 ------------------------------------------------------ CONVERSION TABLE Monthly $ 1,736 $ 1,870 $ 2,137 $ 2,404 $ 2,671 Annual $ 20,834 $ 22, 436 $ 25,642 $ 28,847 $ 32,052 NORMAL PROGRESSION: Step P1 is the starting wage. Advance to Step P2 after six months of employment. .Advance to Step P3 after one year of employment. Advance to Step P4 after two years of employment. Advance to Step P5 after three years of employment. CITY MANAGER'S DISCRETION: Starting step and step advances, within the City Council authorized limits, shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. INTERVALS: P5 is top police officer salary. P1 is 65% of P5; P2 is 70% of P5; P3 is 80% of P5; P4 is 90% of P5. CONVERSION TABLE HOURLY MONTHLY ANNUAL Sergeant (P5 monthly salary plus $310) $ 17.198 $ 2,981 $ 35,772 ------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- LONGEVITY AND EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE: Percent of Base Pay based on longevity or educational credits to be paid as supplementary pay: EDUCATIONAL LONGEVITY COLLEGE QUARTER CREDITS PERCENT ------------ - - - - -- ----------------------- 4 -8 years 45 -89 - 3 % - - 8 -12 years 90 -134 5% 12 -16 years 135 -179 7% 16 years and over 180 or more 9% SPECIAL JOB CLASSIFICATION: 1. Employees classified or assigned by the City of Brooklyn Center to the following job classifications or positions will receive $110 per month or $110 prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: CONVERSION TABLE HOURLY MONTHLY ANNUAL A. Investigator $ 0.635 $ 110 $ 1,320 B. Juvenile Officer $ 0 .635 $ 110 $ 1,320 C. Dog Handler $ 0 .635 $ 110 $ 1,320 2. Employees classified or assigned by the City of Brooklyn Center to the following job classifications or positions will receive $50 per month or $50 prorated for less than a full month in addition to their regular wage rate: CONVERSION TABLE HOURLY MONTHLY ANNUAL A. Corporal $ 0.288 $ 50 $ 600 ----------------------------------------- NOTE: The Police Officer positions are classified as non - exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and are compensated at an hourly rate. This schedule also converts the hourly wage rate to monthly and annual. The conversion tables are for informational purposes only and are not a part of the official wage schedule< -12- R7EMPLOY D (AAP C7F ) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 19 EE CPITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE F • UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 49 POSITIONS HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE LOCAL NO. 49 ----------------------- - - - - -- - -- - R t $ ----------------------- - - - - -- PLAN NOTE: The following Wage Schedule will be in effect from the first payroll period in 1987 through the last payroll period in 1987: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CONVERSION TABLE HOURLY --------------------------- POSITION RATE MONTHLY ANNUAL --------------------------- --------- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- Maintenance III $ 12.60 $ 2,192 $ 26,309 Maintenance II $ 12.10 $ 2,105 $ 25,265 Mechanic $ 12.60 $ 2,192 $ 26,309 Night Service Person $ 11.90 $ 2,071 $ 24,847 Maintenance I 8. 2 $ 7 $ 1,517 $ 18,207 Welding $ 12.35 $ 2,149 $ 25,787 Crew Leader $ 0.52 in addition to regular rate when assigned in writing by the Department Head to assist a Supervisor as Crew Leader while performing such duties. Working out of Classification Pay: Employees required by the Employer to operate certain items of heavy equipment will be paid the Maintenance III rate of pay for those hours assigned to the unit. Employees hired after February 7, 1984, in the Maintenance I classifi- cation who are required by the Employer to operate certain items of light equipment will be paid the Maintenance II rate of pay for those hours assigned to the unit. Standby Pay: Public Utilities employees who are designated by their supervisor to serve in a "standby" status on behalf of the City on a Saturday, Sunday or Holiday will receive as compensation for such service two (2) hours of overtime pay for each day served in such status. Such standby pay shall be in addition to other compensation which the employee is entitled to under this agreement. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: The above positions are classified as non - exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and are compensated at an hourly rate. This schedule also converts the hourly wage rate to monthly and annual equivalents. The schedule converts the hourly rate to an annual rate by multiplying the hourly rate by the number of normal work hours in the current year. The number of normal work hours is determined by subtracting Saturdays and Sundays from the total number of days in the year and multiplying that number by eight hours. There are 2,088 normal work hours in 1987. The schedule converts the annual rate to the monthly rate by dividing the annual rate by twelve months. The conversions are for informational purposes only and are not a part of the officiai' wage schedule. -13- (AAPC7G) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE G LIQUOR STORES PART -TIME HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE LIQUOR STORES ------------------------------------- - - - - -- PART -TIME EMPLOYEES PLAN D Q ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ STEPS --------------------------------------------- POSITION A B C ---------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- Clerk /Stocker 4.75 5.35 6.15 Cashier 4.75 5.35 6.15 Cashier /Office Assistant 6.35 7.35 7.70 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0 NORMAL PROGRESSION: A is starting hourly rate. Advance to Step B after six months employment. Advance to Step C after eighteen months employment. CITY MANAGER'S DISCRETION: Starting grade and step advances, within the City Council authorized limits, shall be at the discretion of the City Manager. -14- (AAPC7H) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE H EMPLOYEE INSURANCE BENEFITS % 7 EMPLOYEE -- - ° ° ° °- ------ --- - - - -- INSURANCE BENEFITS D mmp M 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ L.E.L.S., LOCAL NO. 82, POLICE OFFICERS: --------------------------------------- The City will contribute up to a maximum of $175 per month per employee toward health, life, long -term disability insurance, and dental insurance. (Dental insurance not to exceed $15.) INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 49, AFL -CIO: ----------------------------------------------------------------- The City will contribute up to a maximum of $175 per month per employee for group health and life insurance including dependent coverage for calendar year 1987. By mutual agreement, employees may use $15 of the per month per employee of health insurance dollars for dental insurance for all unit employees. NON- ORGANIZED CITY EMPLOYEES: ---------------------- - - - - -- The City will contribute, effective with insurance premiums due January 1, 1987, payment of an amount not to exceed $175 per month toward the cost of coverage under the Brooklyn Center Group Hospital - Medical Insurance Plans, $5,000 Group Life Insurance Policy, and Group Dental Insurance as fringe benefit compensation for permanent full -time employees (and eligible dependents) who are not members of recognized bargaining units. (Dental insurance not to exceed $15.) CITY MANAGER: As provided in the City Manager's Personal Service Contract. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -15- (AAPC71) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE I 1987 CITY MANAGER'S COMPENSATION AGREEMENT CITY MANAGER'S ------------------------------------ - - - - -- COMPENSATION AGREEMENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT: ---------------------------------- 1. The City Charter, adopted by the voters of the City of Brooklyn Center on November 8, 1966, created the position of City Manager. 2. Gerald G. Splinter was appointed City Manager effective October 17, 1977 (Resolution No. 77 -168) and is currently serving in that position. 3. The position of City Manager is not covered by the provisions of Chapter 17 of the City Ordinances. 4. Other conditions of employment are hereby explicitly stated: a. Mr. Splinter shall perform the duties and meet the obligations for the position of City Manager as set forth in the City Charter and Chapter 6 of the City Ordinances. • b. Mr. Splinter's salary for 1987 shall be 66 2 per annum and $ , p adjustment to the City Manager's salary shall be reviewed annually in conjunction with the establishment of salaries for City employees. C. The City Manager shall be granted sick leave and holiday benefits granted to other employees and commencing January 1, 1983 he will earn four weeks vacation per year. d. The City Manager shall reside within Brooklyn Center within twelve months following the effective date of appointment. e. The full premium cost for individual and family coverage under the Brooklyn Center Group Health and Dental Plan and /or Insurance Plan and the full premium cost for two times his annual salary of term life insurance under the Brooklyn Center Group Life Insurance Plan shall be paid by the City on the City Manager's behalf. f. The City Manager shall receive $250 per month if the City does not provide a car for the City Manager's twenty -four hour business use. g. In the event of resignation, notice thereof shall be submitted in writing to the City Council at least 30 days prior to the effective date. h. In the event of dismissal by the City Council, the City Manager shall be notified at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of dismissal and shall be furnished a written statement of the reasons therefor, and further, shall be . granted a hearing thereon, if requested. -16- 1987 City Manager's Compensation Agreement, Schedule I, Continued: ----------------------------------------------------------------- i. In the event of voluntary resignation or death, the City Manager shall receive sevrerance pay based on the severance plan established in the City Personnel Ordinance. j. In the event of involuntary resignation or dismissal, severance pay based on unpaid accrued vacation leave and six month's salary shall be paid to the City Manager; however, in the event the City Manager is terminated because of his conviction of any illegal act involving personal gain to him, the City shall have no obligation to pay the aggregate severance sum designated in this paragraph. k. Minnesota State Law provides City Managers with a choice of pension plans: PERA or a deferred compensation fund. The City of Brooklyn Center will contribute to the qualified fund of the City Manager's choice a dollar amount equivalent to the required PERA contribution. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ D D D -17- (AAPC7J) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1987 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN SCHEDULE J PERSONNEL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY PERSONNEL EXPENSE --- - - - - -- --- - - - - -- PML REIMBURSEMENT POLICY ---------------------- - -- _R 0 - - 1-%'7 : L i l D A F � R � E- ------------------------- It is necessary that there be a uniform policy of reimbursement for travel, lodging, meals, and mileage expenses incurred by City employees and officials while performing their duties as representatives of the City of Brooklyn Center. It is also necessary that existing reimbursement policies be reviewed annually, and be adjusted when necessary, to reflect the current costs of travel, lodging, meals, and the use of personal automobiles for business use. Therefore, all existing reimbursement policies are hereby ammended to be as follows for costs incurred on January 1, 1987 and thereafter: 1. Reimbursements of travel expenses are intended to refund actual costs incurred by City employees and officials while traveling as authorized representatives of the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. In order to qualify for travel reimbursement, trips to a destination exceeding 100 miles from Brooklyn Center must have the prior approval of the City Manager. 3• Requests for travel advances intended to defray costs incurred while on a trip and prior to susbmission of an expense report shall be submitted to the City Manager for approval at least seven days in advance of the trip. 4. Travel advances shall be limited to 90% of the estimated expenses for lodging, meals, and other related travel expenses. Costs of transportation and registration shall be advanced in full. 5. A properly verified, itemized expense claim shall be submitted to the City Manager for approval within ten days following the date of return from an authorized trip. Expense claims shall be accompanied by receipts for: a. Transportation costs to and from the destination via coach, tourist, or economy class transportation. b. Lodging costs not to exceed a reasonable single occupancy rate as determined by the City Manager. c. Conference or meeting registration fees. d. Any unusual items for which advance approval has been obtained from the City Manager. 6. The mode of transportation must be approved by the City Manager prior to any authorized trip. Personal automobile use for authorized trips will be reimbursed at a.rate of 21 cents per mile, or an amount equal to air travel tourist class, whichever is the lesser. -18- 1987 Personnel Expense Reimbursement Policy, Schedule J, Continued ------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -- 7. Reimbursement for meals while on authorized travel will be for actual expenditures with a maximum of $24 per day allowable, including tips. There shall be no per diem for meals or any other expenses. The maximum meal reimbursement for any fraction of a full day shall be as follows: a. Breakfast - $5.00 b. Lunch - $7.00 r D 0 c. Dinner -.,$12.00 _ _,... The full cost shall be reimbursed for meals which are a scheduled activity of a conference or meeting and the cost of such meals is not included in the registration fee. 8. Employees and officials of the City shall be reimbursed for luncheon and dinner costs as authorized by the City Manager in accordance with the following provisions: a. The actual cost of the meal not to exceed $10.00 will be allowed for meals associated with attendance at training sessions when meals are an integral part of the program or when there are training sessions before and after the meal, or, for attendance at regular luncheon meetings of professional or related associations. b. The entire cost of related meals shall be reimbursed to those employees or officials designated to represent the City at meetings or other City business functions that the Council or City Manager deems necessary. 9. Employees or officials of the City who, in the conduct of official City business, are authorized or required to use their personal automobiles for transportation shall be reimbursed at the rate of 21 cents per mile for mileage incurred in the conduct of such business. An' itemized mileage expense claim must be submitted to the City Manager for approval. 10. Certain employees of the City are required to drive a City vehicle to their home and keep it there while off -duty. They must do so to be able to respond to emergency situations. These emergency situations include fire and police protection, civil defense and restoring City services such as water, sewer, and streets. It may also be necessary to keep a City vehicle at home for security purposes or other City business purposes. These vehicles must be used for City business use only and cannot be used for the personal use of any employee. The employees who are authorized to keep a City vehicle at their home on a regular basis while off -duty are as follows: The Director of Emergency Preparedness The Chief of Police The Supervisor of Street Maintenance The Supervisor of Parks Maintenance The Supervisor p of Public Utilities The Liquor Stores' Manager -19- Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 13, 1987: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Avenue N. Scoreboard Pizza 6816 Humboldt Avenue N. C lef of Police FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Village House, Inc. 6100 Brooklyn Boulevard T_• (7 �Pi1?t1 YL Sanitarian GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE LICENSE Block Sanitation 6741 79th Avenue N. Mengelkoch Company 119 NE 14th Street Metro Refuse 8168 West 125th Street Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P. 0. Box 26 Peterson Brothers Sanitation, Inc. 740 Industry Avenue d Robbinsdale Transfer, Inc. 5232 Hanson Court ?�Ct')2 Sanitarian ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE St. Alphonsus Fun Fair 7025 Halifax Avenue N. Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Erickson Heating and A/C 8823 Zealand Avenue N. Buil g Official * MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP LICENSE ,n )' North Star Dodge Center, Inc. 6800 Brooklyn Boulevard City Clerk NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Jimmy Jingle 1304 East Lake Street Fingerhut Telemarketing 6860 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Palmer Lake Plaza 6860 Shingle Creek Pkwy. '��GUYL Sanitarian PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Jimmy Jingle 1304 East Lake Street Fingerhut Telemarketing 6860 Shingle Creek Pkwy. e'vUlYC. Sanitarian SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE Ace Sign Company 1991 North Broadway �• pit_ Build"ng Official / SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE Kay -Bee Toy & Hobby 1320 Brookdale Center 4__ : h_e 4 Lna. , y < 1 Sanitarian 6j� GENERAL APPROVAL L D. K. Weeks, City Clerk