Laserfiche WebLink
zi <br /> CITY OF ST. ANTHONY <br /> RESOLUTION 98-072 <br /> A RESOLUTION APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND <br /> AUTHORIZING PAYMENT THEREOF <br /> BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of St. Anthony, Minnesota, as follows: <br /> Section 1. Background. <br /> 1.1 The City of St. Anthony (hereinafter referred to as the "City") is a defendant in <br /> the cases of Starks v. Minneapolis Police Recruitment System, et al.; Hennepin <br /> County District Court File No. EM93-219, and Fields v. Minnesota Police <br /> Recruitment System, et al.; District Court File No. EM93-218. <br /> 1.2 The Court has concluded in said actions that the defendants violated Minnesota <br /> Statutes, Chapter 363, the Minnesota Human Rights Act, in the administration <br /> of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System (MFRS) testing process for entry <br /> level police officers employment screening and that defendants are obligated to <br /> pay certain damages and penalties. <br /> 1.3 The City has previously approved a formula for the allocation of costs and <br /> damages among the defendants. <br /> 1.4 The order of the Court also requires ongoing reporting to the Court of <br /> information about all written tests used by the City for police officer selection <br /> until January 1, 2004. <br /> 1.5 The Council has been presented with a proposal for settlement of these cases <br /> under which the defendant cities would collectively pay the sum of Fifteen <br /> Thousand Dollars ($15,000) in addition to damages, costs, and fees previously <br /> awarded by the Court if Counsel for plaintiffs and defendant are successful in <br /> securing a complete dismissal of the cases. <br /> 1.6 The Council has determined that it is in the public interest to settle the cases to <br /> avoid the administrative burden, commitment of staff resources, attorneys' fees <br /> and costs associated with ongoing reporting to the Court. <br /> 1.7 The MPRS has proposed that payment of the settlement be allocated among the <br /> defendant cities in accordance with Attachment One to this Resolution, which <br /> allocation is the same as that used for costs and damages previously awarded by <br /> the Court, and which allocation the Council finds to be fair and reasonable. <br />