My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_9302
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
09xxx
>
9300
>
res_9302
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:37:34 AM
Creation date
12/2/2004 9:12:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
9302
Resolution Title
Approving allocation of damages and authorizing payment thereof in the case of Starks and Field v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System (5/28/96).
Resolution Date Passed
5/28/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />1.4 The Court has also determined that the MPRS, a joint <br />powers organization of which the city is a member, or was <br />a member at the time the actions were commenced, is <br />obligated to pay each of the two plaintiffs punitive <br />damages in the amount of $8,500. <br /> <br />1.5 The Court has not yet made a determination as to the <br />award of plaintiffs' costs, disbursements, and attorneys' <br />fees. <br /> <br />1.6 The Court also determined that the unlawful <br />discrimination by the defendants can reasonably be <br />remedied in part by paying a statutory penalty in the <br />amount of $300,000 to the state of Minnesota, or in lieu <br />of such penalty establishing a reasonable minority race <br />hiring commitment satisfactory to the Court. In the <br />event a hiring commitment is submitted to the Court which <br />is found to be satisfactory it may be that the paYment of <br />a statutory penalty will not be required. <br /> <br />1.7 The MPRS has proposed that the paYment of monetary <br />damages to the plaintiffs described above in paragraph <br />1.3, punitive damages described above in paragraph 1.4 <br />and plaintiffs' costs, disbursements and attorneys' fees <br />be allocated among the parties on the following basis: <br /> <br />20% of such costs would be divided equally among <br />the 36 city defendants. 80% of such damages would <br />be divided pro rata on the basis of the population <br />served by the cities police departments as of the <br />time the actions were commenced in January of 1993. <br />Such population would be determined on the basis of <br />the Metropolitan Council estimates for cities in <br />the metropolitan area. For communities outside of <br />the metropolitan area the population would be <br />determined by the State Demographer's estimates. <br />For communities with service contracts under which <br />police service is provided to other municipalities, <br />the populations of such other municipalities would <br />be included in the computation of population <br />served. <br /> <br />II. Findings. <br /> <br />2.1 It is in the best interest of the City to reach mutual <br />agreement on the allocation of damages. <br /> <br />2.2 The allocation proposed by the MPRS is found to be fair <br />and reasonable and consent thereto is in the best <br />interest of the City. <br /> <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.