Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> • CITY OF ST. ANTHONY <br /> COUNTY OF HENNEPIN/RAMSEY <br /> STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 96-021 <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF DAMAGES <br /> AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT THEREOF <br /> BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. AnthonyMinnesota (City) <br /> 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 County District <br /> Court File No. EM93-219, and Fields v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System, et al.; District <br /> 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 of the Minnesota <br /> Police Recruitment System (MPRS) testing process for entry level police officers employment <br /> screening and that defendants are obligated to pay certain damages and penalties. <br /> 1.3. In its order dated November 6, 1995, the Court determined that the defendant cities <br /> are obligated to pay $156,688 in damages for lost wages and emotional distress. <br /> 1.4. The Court has also determined that the MPRS, a joint powers organization of which <br /> the City is a member, or was a member at the time the actions were commenced, is obligated to <br /> pay each of the two plaintiffs punitive damages in the amount of $8,500. <br /> 1.5. The Court has not yet made a determination as to the award of plaintiffs' costs, <br /> disbursements, and attorneys' fees. <br /> 1.6. The Court also determined that the unlawful discrimination by the defendants can <br /> reasonably be remedied in part by paying a statutory penalty in the amount of $300,000 to the <br /> state of Minnesota, or in lieu of such penalty establishing a reasonable minority race hiring <br /> commitment satisfactory to the Court. In the event a hiring commitment is submitted to the <br /> Court which is found to be satisfactory, it may be that the payment of a statutory penalty will <br /> not be required. <br /> 1.7. The MPRS has proposed that the payment of monetary damages to the plaintiffs <br /> • described above in paragraph 1.3, punitive damages described above in paragraph 1.4 and <br /> plaintiffs' costs, disbursements and attorneys' fees be allocated among the parties on the <br /> following basis: <br /> CLL98335 <br /> MP110-2 I <br />