Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date:April 10, 2023 <br /> Item No.: 10.e <br />Department Approval City Manager Approval <br />Item Description: Authorize Food and Beverage Services Agreement Between City of Roseville and <br />Burro Loco Restaurant <br />1 B ACKGROUND <br />2 At the March 22, 2023 meeting the City Council review a draft potential agreement for Burro Loco <br />3 LLC to become the kitchen/grill vendor for the Cedarholm Community Building. Council provided <br />4 staff with some minor feedback and authorized staff to complete the agreement and place the final <br />5 agreement on the consent agenda. <br />6 <br />7 Enclosed is the proposed final agreement (Attachment A). The agreement reflects what was <br />8 presented on March 22 with only minor alterations and clarifications. One substantive change, based <br />9 on feedback received, was the expansion of the minimum spring/fall hours to 11:00am –7:00pm (the <br />10 original agreement proposed 11:00am –6:00pm). <br />11 P OLICY O BJECTIVE <br />12 The proposal is consistent with the city practice of providing the best possible service at the lowest <br />13 cost to citizens and contracting out services where these goals can be met. <br />14 B UDGET I MPLICATIONS <br />15 The adopted 2023 Cedarholm Community Building budget anticipates $15,000 in revenue from the <br />16 kitchen/grill. With the terms of this agreement, $9,000 would be received annually at minimum, plus <br />17 4% of sales. Although the total amount of sales cannot be known, a very conservative estimate based <br />18 on our own experience and previous vendor would be $60,000 per year, which would yield an <br />19 additional $2,400 to the city or a total of $11,400. If the kitchen/grill grows, it is reasonable to <br />20 anticipate revenue that would exceed this very conservative number. <br />21 <br />22 R ACIAL E QUITY I MPACT S UMMARY <br />23 The proposer, Burro Loco, is aminority and women owned business. <br />24 <br />25 The proposed vendor has indicated their ability to prepare food for a broad cross-section of cultural <br />26 groups. <br />27 <br />28 As discussed, this proposed agreement does not include a preferred caterer “opt out” for cultural <br />29 dietary considerationswithout a fee. With our previous vendor, staff found that the cultural opt out <br />30 was overused by renters and put staff in the difficult position of determining what was a legitimate <br />Page 1 of 2 <br /> <br />