Laserfiche WebLink
! II <br /> it <br /> CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON <br /> COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br /> STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> RESOLUTION NO. <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF DAMAGES AND AUTHORIZING <br /> i; <br /> PAYMENT THEREOF <br /> BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of New Brighton, Minnesota as follows: <br /> Section 1. Background. <br /> 1.1. The City of New Brighton (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 <br /> olice Recruitment System(MPRS) testingprocess for entry level police officers' <br /> MinnesotaP y <br /> employment 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 <br /> cities 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 <br /> which the City is a member, or was a member at the time the actions were commenced, is <br /> obligated to 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 /> j, following basis: <br /> . 20% of such costs would be divided equally among the 36 city defendants. 80%of such <br /> damages would be divided pro rata on the basis of the population served by the cities'police <br /> departments as of the time the actions were commenced in January of 1993. Such population <br />