Res 1996 - 26 Approving Allocation of Damages & Authorizing Payment ThereofCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 96- 26
RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF DAMAGES AND AUTHORIZING
PAYMENT THEREOF
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City Mendota Heights,
Minnesota (City) as follows:
Section 1. Background
1.1 The City of Mendota Heights (hereinafter referred to as the "City") is a
defendant in the cases of Starks v. Minneapo/is Police Recruitment
System, et al.; Hennepin County District Court File No. EM93-219,
and Fie/ds v. Minnesota Po/ice Recruitment System, et al.; District
Court File No. EM93-218.
1.2 The Court has concluded in said actions that the defendants violated
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363, the Minnesota Human Rights Act,
in the administration of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System
(MPRS) testing process for entry level police officers employment
screening and that defendants are obligated to pay certain damages
and penalties.
1.3 In its order dated November 6, 1995, the Court determined that the
defendant cities are obligated to pay 5156,688 in damages for lost
wages and emotional distress.
1.4 The Court has also determined that the MPRS, a joint powers
organization of which the City is a member, or was a member at the
time the actions were commenced, is obligated to pay each of the
two plaintiffs punitive damages in the amount of 58,500.
1.5 The Court has not yet made a determination as to the award of
plaintiff's costs, disbursements, and attorney's fees.
1.6 The Court also determined that the unlawful discrimination by the
defendants can reasonably be remedied in part by paying a statutory
penalty in the amount of 5300,000 to the State of Minnesota, or in
lieu of such penalty establishing a reasonable minority race hiring
commitment satisfactory to the Court. In the event a hiring
commitment is submitted to the Court which is found to be
satisfactory, it may be that the payment of a statutory penalty will
not be required.
1.7 The MPRS has proposed that the payment of monetary damages to
the plaintiffs described above in paragraph 1.3, punitive damages
described above in paragraph 1.4 and plaintiffs' costs, disbursements
and attorneys' fees be allocated among the parties on the following
basis:
Twenty percent (20%) of such costs would be divided equally among
the 36 city defendants. Eighty percent (80%) of such damages
would be divided pro rata on the basis of the population served by the
cities police departments as of the time the actions were commenced
in January of 1993. Such population would be determined on the
basis of Metropolitan Council estimates for cities in the metropolitan
area. For communities outside of the metropolitan area the
population would be determined by the State Demographer's
estimates. For communities with service contracts under which
police service is provided to other municipalities, the populations of
such other municipalities would be included in the computation of
population served.
Section 2. Fundina•
2.1 It is in the best interest of the City to reach mutual agreement on the
allocation of damages.
2.2 The allocation proposed by the MPRS is found to be an acceptable
solution and consent thereto is in the best interest of the City.
Section 3. ARnrovals and Authorizations.
3.1 The allocation for payment of damages, penalties, costs,
disbursements and attorneys' fees described above is hereby
approved.
3.2 The City consents and agrees to payment of its share of such
damages, penalties, costs, disbursements and attorneys' fees in
accordance with the allocation formula described above.
3.3 The City Treasurer and Mayor are authorized and directed to make
payment for the City's share of final judgment of such expenses in
accordance with the agreed upon allocation subject to the right of the
defendants cities to appeal all or part of the final judgment.
3.4 This resolution does not amend any previous agreement among the
defendant cities for allocation of defense costs and defendants'
attorneys fees; and nothing herein shall be deemed to be an
agreement as to allocation of any statutory penalties which may be
awarded in the future.
3.5 This resolution constitutes only an agreement between and among all
cities which are defendants in the above-referenced actions which
consent and agree to the allocation formula described above by
adoption of substantially similar resolutions. Nothing herein shall be
deemed an admission of responsibility or a liability in any action for
contribution by an city which has not consented to such allocation or
a waiver by the City of any rights, claims, demands, or causes of
action for contribution by the City against any city which has not
agreed to such allocation.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of May,
1996.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
gy �w-� � • l%l.w� -�'
Charles E. Mertensotto
IViayor
ATTEST:
��J .�✓
athleen M. Swanson
City Clerk