91-1861 �,
;J p /
�����'i�'�,����' f 6 Council File � ��-�D� � "
vv�:r �-
Green Sheet � ��J��
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Pr sented By �
Referred To � -t.Ps.t/ Committee: Date �O " �j - y/
WHEREAS, the current guidelines to the Child Care Partnership
Program state that public and private educational institutions
are ineligible applicants; and
WHEREAS, another grant program's guidelines were used as� the
model for drafting the Child Care Partnership Program guidelines
originally; and
WHEREAS, the guidelines for that other grant program were written
when federal guidelines prohibited giving Community Development
Block Grant money to public and private educational institutions;
and
WHEREAS, the federal guidelines no longer exclude educational
institutions as applicants for Communi�y Development Block Grant
funds; and
WHEREAS, federal, state, county, and local government agencies
are ineligible to apply for funds; and
WHEREAS, any eligible applicant would have to meet all the
conditions of Community Development Block Grant funds and the
Child Care Partnership Program, including the provision that any
child care programs awarded funds must serve primarily low and
moderate income families; and
Yeas Navs Absent Reques$ed by Departme t of•
ro
swz � � ,� �-r�'
on �-
a a ee �
�e ma � �
une -� ` �- ��'�.
By:
u
Adopted by Council: Date DEC 5 1991 Form Approved by Cit Attor ey
Adoption C ified by Coun�ll $�ecretary By:
� , �� /
By� '� Approved by Mayor for Submission to
Approved by M,�yor: Da�e Q�� s; ���'� Council
By: �����`�
By:
P3��l6SNE� DEC 14'91
�!G ;t'��,\'�Il4\v'�`rs.���L ' �j'— /�� / �
L
�/
-2-
WHEREAS, the Child Care Selection Team recommends that the Child
Care Partnership Program guidelines be revised to delete
reference to "private and public educational institutions" in the
list of ineligible applicants and that "public schools" be added
to list of ineligible applicants with other government agencies;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the guidelines for the Child Care Partnership
Program be so revised as of the start of the second rour�d of the
1991 Child Care Partnership Program.
m na- �� Navs Absent Requested by Department of:
o w " ��- Community Services-Administration
��
cca ee �_
e a
une �
on � By'
Adopted by Council: Date QEC 5 1991 gorm Ap roved by City Attorney
Adoption C if d by Coun i cretary B � � , _
1--� �'� � y:
- ;
i
BY� � ' �'"' Approved by Mayor for Submission to
��C ��91 Council
Approved by ayor: Date �
, �---
J /� ,.� �
By� CG%il�'���`�"� By'
- . - . l�'/-/��6i ✓
DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL DATE INITIATED � ND _ 12 5 7 7
community services 9/26/91 GREEN SHEET
CONTACT PERSON&PHONE INITIAI/DATE INITIAUDATE
�DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL
Deborah Schlick � 298-4431 A$$IGN �CITYATfORNEY �CITYCLERK
MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA BY(DATE) NUMBER FOR ❑BUDGET DIRECTOR �FIN.&MGT.SERVICES DIR.
ROUTING
ORDER �MAYOR(OR ASSISTAN� �
TOTAL#OF SIGNATURE PAGES 3 (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
ACTION RE�UESTED:
That the Council review the recommendations of the Child Care Selection Team
concerning a change in the guidelines.
RECOMMENDATIONS:Approve(A)or ReJect(R) pERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWIN(i�UESTIONS:
_PLANNING COMMISSION _ CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION �• Has this person/firm ever worked under a contrect for this depariment?
_CIB COMMITfEE _ YES NO
2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
�STAFF — YES NO
_DISTRiCT COUFli' _ 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee?
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE? YES NO
Explaln all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM,ISSUE,OPPORTUNITY(Who,Whet,When,Where,Why):
Confusion about program guidelines has prompted the Sel.ection Team to
recommend a change in guidelines.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
The guidelines will allow reasonable flexibility.
DISADVANTAQES IF APPROVED:
None.
DISADVANTACiES IF NOT APPROVED:
The guidelines unnecessarily exclude good projects.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION S —�— COST/REVENUE BUDGETEp(CIRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNOINGSOURCE N�A ACTIVITYNUMBER
FINANCIAL INFORMATION:(EXPLAIN) ��
� -- � .
NOTE: COMPLETE�DIRECTIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE GREEN SHEET INSTRUCTIONAL
MANUAL AVAILABLE IN THE PURCHASING OFFICE(PHONE NO. 298-4225).
ROUTING ORDER:
Below are correct routings for the five most frequent rypes of documents:
CONTRACTS(assumes authorized budget exists) COUNCIL RESOLUTION (Amend Budgets/Accept. Grants)
1. Outside Agency 1. Department Director
2. Department Director 2. City Attorney
3. City Attorney 3. Budget Director
4. Mayor(for contracts over$15,000) 4. Mayor/Assistant
5. Human Rights(for contracts over$50,000) 5. City Council
6. Finance and Management Services Director 6. Chief Accountant, Finance and Management Services
7. Finance Accounting
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS(Budget Revision) COUNCIL RESOLUTION (all others,and Ordinances)
1. Activity Manager 1. Department Director
2. Department Accountant 2. City Attorney
3. Department Director 3. Mayor Assistant
4. Budget Director 4. City Council
5. Ciry Clerk
6. Chief Accountant, Finance and Management Services
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS (all others)
1. Department Director
2. City Attorney
3. Finance and Management Services Director
4. City Clerk
TOTAL NUMBER OF SIGNATURE PAGES
Indicate the#of pages on which signatures are required and paperclip or flag
each of these pages.
ACTION REGIUESTED
Describe what the projecUrequest seeks to accomplish in either chronologi-
cal order or order of importance,whichever is most appropriate for the
issue. Do not write complete sentences. Begin each item in your list with
a ve�b.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete if the issue in question has been presented before any body,public
or private.
SUPPORTS WHICH COUNCIL OBJECTIVE?
Indicate which Council objective(s)your projecVrequest supports by listing
the key word(s) (HOUSING, RECREATION, NEIGHBORHOODS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
BUDGET, SEWER SEPARATION). (SEE COMPLETE LIST IN INSTRUCTIONAL MANUAL.)
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS:
This information will be used to determine the city's liability for workers compensation claims,taxes and proper civil service hiring rules.
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY
Explain the situation or conditions that created a need for your project
or request.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED
Indicate whether this is simply an annual budget procedure required by law/
charter or whether there are specific ways in which the City of Saint Paul
and its citizens will benefit from this projecUaction.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED
What negative effects or major changes to existing or past processes might
this project/request produce if it is passed(e.g.,traffic delays, noise,
tax increases or assessments)?To Whom?When?For how long?
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED
What will be the negative consequences if the promised action is not
approved?Inabiliry to deliver service?Continued high traffic, noise,
accident rate?Loss of revenue?
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Although you must tailor the information you provide here to the issue you
are addressing, in general you must answer two questions: How much is it
going to cost?Who is going to pay?
_ G'�%/��� ✓
� '' CITY OF SAINT PAUL
�niiS:l•`.
�'--�- OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PAULA MACCABEE
�tECEIVED
SUSAN ODE
Councilmember �OV 2 '7 ��A� LegislativeAide
.7
�I7`� CLERK
Members:
Paula Maccabee. Chair
Bob Long
Janice Rettman
Date: November 27, 1991
COMMITTEE REPORT
HUMAN SERVICES, REGULATED INDUSTRIES AND RULES AND POLICY COMMITTEE
1. A. Presentation on Riverboat Gambling.
NO PRESENTATION WAS MADE. . COPIES OF A PROPOSAL FROM "LOUISIANA CASINO
CRUISES" WERE DISTRIBUTED..
JB. Resolution 91-1826 - approving requests for presentations from
interested parties and City staff regarding riverboat gaming in Saint
Paul (Last in Committee 10=9-91) .
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF A SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION, 3-0;
COMMITTEE ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION RECEIVING PLANNING
& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT'S REPORT ON RIVERBOAT GAMBLING ENTITLED:
"RIVERBOAT GAMBLING IN SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA".
✓
2. Resolution 91-1861 - a resolution to modify Child Care Partnership Program
guidelines to match federal requirements for CDBG funds.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL, 3-0
��. �� 3. � Ordinance 91-1480 - an ordinance to repeal the eligible 10% Club recipients
��t�y l�sted.under Section 409.235 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and to amend
provisions relating to the Youth Funds established by Section 409.23
(Last in Committee 9-25-91) .
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE, 3-0
����s� 4. � Ordinance 91-648 - an Ordinance amending Chapter 411 of the Legislative >
��► Code to provide simpler procedures for taking of adverse action against
Entertainment Licenses (Last in Committee 11-13-91).
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE, 3-1
CITY HALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 612/298-5378
5�46
Printed on Recycied Paper