Council Minutes
17473
March 5, 2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
March 5, 2001
The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in its regular session in the council chambers in City Hall on Monday, March 5, 2001 at the hour of 7:00 o’clock p.m. with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim (on teleconference system), Gershman, Lunak, Klave, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; 1 seat vacant: absent: none..
Mayor Brown announced that anyone wishing to speak to any item may do so by being recognized prior to a vote being taken on the matter; and also noted that the meeting is being televised.
COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTENSEN REPORTED PRESENT
FLOOD REPORT
Al Grasser, acting city engineer, reviewed the flood report dated March 5, 2001: that the Corps of Engineers is working on the first stretch of the levees and expecting advertisement to begin in mid-April, completion of the task is dependent upon land acquisition; Pioneer Construction continues to stockpile rock that will be placed over the Riverside Dam and in addition completed the driving of the sheet piling on the upstream face of the existing dam; HDR Engineering has completed the English Coulee Diversion design and bid package which is tentatively scheduled for bidding in May, 2001; Gowan Construction continues to work with demolition of various facilities from the Corps of Engineers and the Corps has contracted with Ayres Associates for design and preparation of plans and specs. for the large English Coulee pumping station, which will be constructed north of RDO Foods, construction of this station should be underway this summer. He stated re. Staff/Consultant updates that construction is underway at Lift Stations #1 and #5 (in Lincoln Park area and near St. Anne’s Guest Home), with overall construction about 15% complete, the caissons have been dropped in place and form the wet-well; and this will be below or at ground level with building above ground. GFEG is finalizing plans and specifications for the termination of water and sanitary sewer service mains on the dry side of the levee for Phase I, and expect to be doing that construction this summer. He stated he doesn’t have any updates on the federal appropriation process, that they will be testifying on State appropriations next week, HB1023 which includes some of the bonding for the flood protection project, no updates on local funding. He also commented on acquisitions - timing: the acquisition to the English Coulee and especially the Phase I properties are the largest problems they are having right now. He stated that part of what’s holding the process up is judiciary process - that the court hearing on the Almonte Nursing Home was originally scheduled for February and now been changed to March 22. Mr. Swanson stated that on Phase I they do now have the engineering drawings from the Army Corps of Engineers on the partial takes, and that property has not yet been appraised, appraisals are taking from 6 to 8 weeks, that they have delays in scheduling hearings, however, those are all on quick takes and should be able to get the court orders on those; they have found that property owners are not prepared to enter into serious negotiations for some time after they receive the initial offers and fully intend to give property owners an opportunity to study our appraisal and make counter-proposals if they do not accept the appraisals - that within the last week or so they have seen some progress on property owners entering into purchase agreements with us - the acquisition process has been compressed and that there has not been sufficient time in most cases for many to study their options, and as a result will probably enter into more eminent domain proceedings than had originally intended to simply speed up the process through quick takes. He stated they hoped to enter into agreements with many property owners where we will deposit with the Court the amount of our appraisal and allow the Court to disburse those funds to the property owner immediately, we would then get possession of the property but would allow the property owner additional time to consider the offer or to come back with counter-offers if need be to proceed to litigate on the actual valuation of the property, this would at least provide us with the possession or the access end of the property, that this may upset some property owners that they may not have the negotiations that they had hoped for, that we perhaps have done involuntary acquisition but in light of the time frame that we have for the project, it appears that is the only option the City really has.
Council Member Lunak questioned status of the Norman house on Elmwood Drive. Mr. Swanson stated that we do have an appraisal, there appear to be some issues to be addressed in the appraisal and intend to make an offer and if we need to move forward with a quick take, we’re prepared to do that. Council Member Lunak asked if the property owner doesn’t sell, if there was a way to leave them on the wet side, does every property have to be acquired. Mr. Swanson stated that property is not absolutely required for the construction of the levee, but as a practical matter our intention is where possible to acquire as much property on the wet side levees as we can - that other than any partial takes of land, that would be the only one that we need remaining to address as a full take - that as he understands the design that is an option that the council would potentially have and your temporary levee protection actually goes outside of the property line and into the right of way.
Mr. Grasser reported that on the English Coulee Diversion 2 houses have been acquired and appraisals have been completed on the last of the 50 partial land acquisitions, offers have been made for two of the commercial structures and to 24 agricultural parcels and first purchase agreement for agricultural land has been signed. On other phases property owners continue to opt into the acquisition process, 6 properties are in this stage, there are currently 12 flood alignment homes for sale that have been advertised for sale. He stated that on historic properties the standard mitigation agreement for the 14 historic homes is being finalized. The Greenway attachment is enclosed. That the interim flood protection plans - Xcel Energy has completed their work on the south side of DeMers and demobilized the thermodesorption plant north of the city, and in the spring will come back and finish up site work. He stated on the Southend Update, the draft of the Barr Phase II Study for the southeast levee alignment was reviewed and comments have been forwarded back to the consultant; and the City and County have instructed Barr to update the report to take into account the Corps’ higher design water surface levels (the report will be due the end of the month). He reviewed upcoming meetings.
Mr. Grasser stated he included the spring flood outlook that the National Weather Service has produced, and is 90-day outlook for flood potential, and these will be updated in mid-March. He stated that where we have interim levees and don’t have a continuous line of defense, the top or interim levees is at about 54 feet, not saying we have 54 ft. of protection now, because we don’t have any freeboard and when to the top of some of these dikes, they tend to develop tension cracks over time. Council Member Lunak asked protection level for the entire city, and where is the weak-link. Mr. Grasser stated those are several of the openings, have some that we need to start closing - to about 42 ft., have several closures that we have to do - one of the weakest areas because of its extent is the area on North Columbia Road - that’s good naturally to about 50 feet and if have to address that - a mile or better. An average for the entire city is about 49 or 50 feet and have to make efforts to go that far, plus free board.
Council Member Bjerke stated that in the Greenway update it stated that they will be hiring an intern to assist and that no additional funds will be needed, and asked if they were taking funds from the slot that’s vacant. Mr. Grotte stated they anticipated someone who would be a student and working up to 15-20 hours a week for that position, try that to see how that works.
Mr. Burke stated in the Greenway Memo re. mowing and maintenance, it states there will be 3 entities responsible for the maintenance, and asked if each was going to let contracts for that. Mr. Grotte stated the 3 entities are the Grand Forks Park District, Urban Development and Engineering Departments, that the Park District will have their own process - that Urban Development and Engineering Departments talked about advertising together, opening bids together, but each have their own separate contract - they have a different type of mowing, Urban Development around houses, etc.; and Engineering has a rough mowing (levees, etc.).
Council Member Burke stated there is a Grand Forks Nature Center proposal - which is in the CIP, where being told that at some point the council can vote it out, but until then it’s still there and we continue planning for it and at some point later the council will get it for final approval - that the total cost now is est. at about $750,000 with the local share (betterment funds) of approx. $450,000, and we’re moving down the road on the planning. Mr. Grotte stated their direction from the previous meetings were to come up with a concept of what the nature center might be so have something to present to the public, not going to do any kind of design or layout but concept of what the people of Grand Forks would want in a nature center - would be working with the schools, Dakota Science Center, Fish & Wildlife, bird watchers, etc. and determine concept and address at public meeting and come to the council for decision - preliminary planning to get sense for where headed or if not. Council Member Burke stated he hoped staff would take the opinion of a few of the council members that when talking about close to $500,000 of local betterment money , there are some people on the council who would like to see that put off until after the dike is done, as have a lot of bills to pay before doing something like that. Mr. Grotte stated that is an option. Council Member Christensen reminded Mr. Grotte that at the citizens meeting that representations made to the citizens, had no present intentions of doing a nature center and it seems 30-45 days later we’re moving forward with the nature center - Mr. Grotte stated it’s on the south side of Belmont Coulee - about half mile south of Olson/Elmwood area around 40th or 47th. Council Member Brooks stated that staff just brings proposals to us, the council keeps voting to spend that money.
Mr. Grasser reported that unfortunately it’s his duty to inform the council that Mr. Grotte has accepted employment outside of North Dakota, and will be leaving at the end of March and will be missed.
COMMENTS BY CONGRESSMAN POMEROY
Mayor Brown welcomed Congressman Earl Pomeroy. Mr. Pomeroy stated he was in Grand Forks and had some open time this evening, that he was interested in the preceding flood report; that at this point in time your challenges are somewhat difficult, want people to make the necessary preparations for the higher water to come without alarming people, the most sensitive difficult part of the flood fight gone because of the relocation of properties, the work the city has done relative to interim flood fight plans is commendable and a demonstration to the country about what a community can do to make sure that even in interim status while they build a permanent dike, you’re ready for whatever nature will deal you. He stated on the permanent dike, doesn’t want much anxiety in this community about whether or not the federal government is going to continue to make its installments on the dike construction dollars - some may have noted that in the President’s budget we’re looking at a $600 million reduction in the proposed funding of the Corps of Engineers - 14% cut. that they were concerned about what this might mean relative to the Grand Forks dike, we got funded to $13 million last year but are going back for $35 million this year because that’s what the construction timetable calls for in terms of federal construction dollars - they are pleased to hear words of clarification from the administration that they are going to be tough on new starts, but we are not a new start and not a new idea, the case has been proven overwhelmingly about the need for the dike and with construction underway the City and the State absolutely participating to their required dimensions, it’s all systems go. He stated he was pleased that as he looks at the council (a number of new faces) since he last had the opportunity to talk with you that the signals from the City are full speed ahead, that in tight dollars with that kind of cut recommendation the dollars would be tighter than ever, and it is important for the delegation level to understand clearly that this permanent flood protection through construction of the dike continues to be the strong will of the city, and that is his understanding as of this point; that they’re here to help and have been partners all along and really getting exciting as looking at permanent protection coming on line as the construction proceeds, and that he would take comments from council if there were any.
Council Member Gershman thanked Mr. Pomeroy for everything he has done and congratulated him on his appointment to the House Ways and Means Committee, that is no small feat for someone in position of small state, lone congressman, and congratulated him. Congressman Pomeroy thanked mayor and council members.
CITIZEN REQUESTS
The deputy city auditor stated that any person wishing to bring an item not otherwise on the agenda to the attention of the mayor and city council may address the council at this time; and that no action will be taken on these items which would be referred to staff for follow up and report.
There were no comments or requests.
SUSPEND AGENDA, CONSIDER METRO TRANSIT
CENTER CONSTRUCTION BIDS AND AWARD BIDS TO
LOW BIDDERS
Council Member Brooks moved to suspend the agenda and move to the item re. approval of Metro Transit Center construction bids; seconded by Council Member Martinson. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
Mayor Brown asked for discussion on this item.
Several individuals in the audience addressed the council and spoke in favor of the metro transit center:
Petra Clemens, 106 North 3rd Street, #501
Storme Stennes, Greater Grand Forks Senior Citizens Center, 620 4th Avenue South
Mary Weaver, Browning Arts, 23 South 4th Street (home address 509 Cherry Street)
Frank Harlow, 110 Cherry Street, #102
Erik Williamson, 1105 Landeco Lane.
Leon Pierce, 806 South 10th Street, Triangle Transportation, stated that he read the newspaper that the City is going to have the transit center, and also Greyhound and other regional carriers; that he learned that some people in the city have contacted Greyhound but he is the Greyhound agent in Grand Forks and no one has contacted him about it. He stated they mentioned regional carriers and that he is a regional carrier as he owns Triangle Transportation and operate out of that bus depot as well in his regular route to Winnipeg everyday and connects with Greyhound; he asked if the City was going to take the Greyhound agency downtown and then he won’t have the Greyhound agency which means revenue for him, and if that will help the city justify the operating of this; that no one has discussed this with him and that he would like to know. He stated that he can’t say that the transit center wouldn’t be good, they have them in other cities, that they’re modeling this after the one in St. Cloud; and that when he hasn’t been contacted, if the City is trying to take this away from him.
Council Member Lunak stated he had attended a meeting several weeks ago and representatives of Greyhound were at that meeting, and it was his understanding that staff would contact Triangle 1) to find out if there was interest to come to the metro center, and 2) because he was the agent; and that Mr. Pierce is stating that he has not been contacted. Roger Foster, Public Transportation Department, stated he has talked with Mr. Pierce but need to keep in mind that the first contact that was made was made by Greyhound to our MPO and it was done through the consultant when they were looking at the optimum square footage that they needed in a transfer center, that he has talked with Mr. Pierce but the discussion was between Greyhound initially making the contact to the MPO and himself back and forth, but the City has no intention of being a ticket agent for Greyhound, had that discussion that same day, and at this point don’t need to violate the integrity of the on-going negotiations with Greyhound but have kept Mr. Pierce informed. Mr. Foster stated he has had conversation with Mr. Pierce quite a while ago on this issue and then as well as now no decisions had been made and certainly the City had not even discussed becoming an agent for Greyhound, and representatives of Greyhound have told us that what is good for Greyhound is good for Mr. Pierce.
Council Member Burke stated that the idea of spending $550,000 on a building that provides momentary shelter for 180 and 200 people a day, that if it’s really about providing shelter to people, have people waiting longer when they get on the bus than going between one bus and another downtown, maybe better off spending money on shelters and putting more shelters on corners around town than in one place where a small portion of the bus riders every day are going to be. He stated that another idea that’s been talked about is whether or not this is truly the right place for it and will hear a consultant’s report in 8 days on a proposed route system which may or may not impact whether or not this ends up being the right place for it to be.
Council Member Hamerlik moved that as there was a bidding deficiency (failure to provide separate envelopes) in the bid of Century Electric, Inc., to reject and return the bid unopened. Council Member Gershman seconded the motion. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
Council Member Lunak stated he supports this issue and moved to approve and accept the low bidders of the Metro Transit Center as follows: General contract: Peterson Construction, Inc. in the amount of $398,500.00 (no acceptance of alternatives); Mechanical contract: C.L. Linfoot Company in the amount of $19,056.00; and Electrical contract: Bergstrom Electric, Inc. in the amount of $31,800.00. The motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson.
Council Member Gershman stated he was in favor of the downtown location and the concept of doing this downtown but questions the cost, that he is not going to question the design anymore as the architects from Johnson Laffen took time to spend with him to explain it, and the cost of going back to redesign the building wouldn’t make any sense, and would like to consider the saw-toothed design by moving the building back and saw-tooth design is where you actually park on the street and that would save us $75,000 because site work would be less, and moved a substitute motion that we approve the building, the concept but with the saw-tooth design, which puts the parking in front. Council Member Burke seconded the motion. Council Member Gershman stated if we were to redesign to the saw-tooth, civil engineering would be about $5,000.
Mr. Swanson stated under the procedural rules there is not provision for a substitute motion, however, there is a provision for an amendment by substitution, and what he brought forward is appropriate to be handled as an amendment. Council Member Gershman agreed to that and Mayor Brown noted that Council Member Gershman has an amendment for substitution, and Council Member Burke seconded the motion
Council Member Hamerlik asked what this has to do with the bidding process, both for extension of the timeline we have, new drawings and if we would be awarding the bid tonight subject to that. Mr. Feland stated that if we change the design and accept the bids, would have to do a change order (would have to have Johnson Laffen Architects and CPS, Ltd. to redesign the configurations to make sure that it would be acceptable and possibly change order based upon a new design, or rebid the project based upon a new design.
Council Member Bjerke stated that the real question here is the type of public transportation the City of Grand Forks should have and by doing this make it more difficult to address the real issue, which is public transportation issue, and issued challenge to the mayor and the council, citizens and staff, every time you see a bus drive by for the next two weeks, count the number of people on that bus and then come back and tell them we’re providing efficient transportation system; doesn’t think we are and can do better and by adding this on it’s going to be more difficult to address the real issue - the report that is coming up is going to touch around the edges next week and not address the real issue, and the time to address the issue is now before we construct this building and down the road adding routes and extend service, etc. and that’s the real issue - are we doing what we do efficiently and if not, the citizens of Grand Forks and if we’re not going to address that, and if council will not address the efficiency our system, maybe should wonder what else doing inefficiently that we won’t address.
Council Member Brooks stated that the discussion is not whether to have a bus system, that this came forward and has been through previous councils, asked whether it is the best location and is cost effective, that staff has provided information and input from the public, and center downtown is issue before us tonight, that people want a warm place to wait for the bus, the issue of it being downtown is an issue, that we have a college with a lot of bus riders in another area of town, have a major shopping complex in another area of town, there are other things to be considered.
Council Member Kreun stated there is a need for public transportation, need to be aware of what public transportation is, that it becomes a quality of life, that we want to send signals to other businesses and other people outside our community; that it becomes an issue of economic development if we have these amenities that people want in our community and need and use; that the project presented to us was well thought out, developed and should utilize that particular system that we have in place at this time. He stated that he had the opportunity to visit with the mayor of East Grand Forks and council member, Mark Holey, and one of the representatives from East Grand Forks, Mr. Knoff, each individually, and each one gave the same individual comment - that they have to redo their routes, southend used very little, and ones in downtown and north end are very important to them and would support the usage of this particular building downtown, and probably not support the usage of a building somewhere else, that particular cost, if we do not utilize their input, would be $100,000, and if they provide 5% of the ridership and contribute 20% of the cost of the building, look to see if economically prudent if we do not use 83% of the federal funding that’s available to us - and the economically prudent portion of that brings to us as taxpayers between $20,000 and $30,000 out of our particular tax dollars, that it may not be the best solution in the world but at this time it’s a good solution and economically prudent, and asked that they consider voting for it.
Council Member Martinson questioned if we were to use the allocated grant money by September of this year; Mr. Foster stated that was correct, the largest portion of this apportionment is our 1999 discretionary grant and we have until September to use it, there’s no guarantee that we can use it for anything else.
Council Member Lunak and Council Member Burke called for the question. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
Upon call for the question on the amendment and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen - 6; voting “nay”: Council Members Stevens, Hamerlik, Lunak, Klave, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 7. Mayor Brown declared the motion defeated.
Upon call for the question on the original motion and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Klave, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 8; voting “nay”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Burke, Christensen - 5. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik to approve the low bidders as follows: General construction: Peterson Construction, Inc. $398,500.00, with no alternatives; Mechanical construction, C.L. Linfoot Company, $19,056.00; and Electric construction: Bergstrom Electric, Inc., $31,800.00. It was seconded by Council Member Martinson.
Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 13; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
COUNCIL MEMBER MARTINSON EXCUSED
The deputy city auditor reported that all matters listed on this portion of the agenda are considered to be routine or non-controversial and will be enacted by one vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the governing body or administrative coordinator request specific items be removed.
A request to accept bid for cellular service, with a recommendation to approve acceptance of Wireless North bid in the amount of $1800 per month.
A request from the Health Department for budget amendment to reflect increase in budget for School Nursing Grant in the amount of $24,700 for period January 10, 2001 to June 30, 2001, with recommendation to approve the budget amendment.
A request from Health Department for budget amendment to reflect increase in budget for Health Tracks Grant in the amount of $18,332, with a recommendation to approve the budget amendment.
A request from the Planning Department for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Section 18-0204(2) Definitions related to wireless communication facilities, amending Section 18-0206 A-1 (Limited Development) District, amending Section 18-0208 R-1 (Single Family Residence) District, amending Section 18-0209 R-2 (One and Two Family Residence) District, Section 18-0210 R-3 (Multiple Family Residence - Medium Density) District, Section 18-0211 R-4 (Multiple Family Residence, High Density) District, Section 18-0212 R-5 (Mobile Home Residence) District, Section 18--213 R-M (manufactured Home Residence) District, Section 18-0214 B-1 (Limited Business) District, Section 18-0215 B-2 (Shopping Center) District, Section 18-0216 B-3 (General Business) District, Section 18-0217 B-4 (Central Business) District, Section 18-0218 I-1 (Light Industrial) District, Section 18-0221 U-D (University) District, Section 18-0303 Height, Section 18-0310.1 relating to wireless communications towers and antennas, with a recommendation to reconsider wireless communications tower ordinance, give preliminary approval, and schedule a public hearing for April 2, 2001.
A request from the Planning Department for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article 2, Section 18-0204, Rules and Definitions, subsection (2) and Article 3, Rules and Regulations, Section 18-0301, Signs, subsection (9) relating to Multi-tenant building, Unified Shopping Center and Ground Monument Sign(s), with a recommendation to grant preliminary approval of the ordinance and recommend to grant preliminary approval and introduce the ordinance, set a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission on March 7, 2001 and a public hearing before the council on April 2, 2001.
A request from the Engineering Department for consideration of bids for construction of City Project No. 5200, 2001 Flood Preparation, with recommendation to authorize staff to, if necessary, award contract to low bidder, either Gowan Construction, Inc. or Nodak Contracting, a Division of Strata Corporation, as determined by the need for clay.
A request from the Engineering Department for consideration of bids for construction of City Project No. 5198, 2001 Asphalt Street Repairs, with recommendation to award contract to low bidder, Aggregate Industries, in the amount of $18,430.00.
A request from the Engineering Department for consideration of bids for construction of City Project No. 5197, 2001 Concrete Street Repairs, with recommendation to award contract to low bidder, Opp Construction in the amount of $177,220.00.
A request from the Public Works Department for consideration of a budget amendment for the Street Department in the amount of $50,000 to purchase capital equipment, with a recommendation to approve the budget amendment.
A request from the Engineering Department for presentation of the facility plan amendment for the Water Reclamation Facility Improvements Interim Residuals Management Plan, with a recommendation for approval of the Facility Plan amendment and permission to forward the document to the North Dakota Department of Health with the intent of application for 55 percent Clean Water State Revolving Loan funding of the anticipated total project costs.
A request from the Mayor’s Office for confirmation of the mayor’s appointments to Ad Hoc Committee to review Community Events/Arts Grant Program applications, with recommendation to confirm the Mayor’s appointment of Council Members Burke, Gershman, Glassheim, Hamerlik as city council representatives and Terry Hanson as staff to the Ad Hoc Committee.
The matter of the Mayor’s reappointment of Fred MacGregor to the Grand Forks City Civil Service Commission, with a recommendation to confirm the Mayor’s reappointment of Fred MacGregor to the Grand Forks City Civil Service Commission for a three-year term which will expire December 8, 2003.
It was moved by Council Member Klave and seconded by Council Member Kreun that these recommendations be and are hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motions carried.
Council Member Klave introduced an ordinance entitled “An ordinance amending specific sections of Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code and enacting a new section relating to wireless communication antennas and towers”, which was presented, read and passed on its first reading.
Council Member Klave introduced an ordinance entitled “An ordinance relating to the Grand Forks City Land Development code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article II”, which was presented, read and passed on its first reading.
APPROVE RECOMMENDATION OF RFP REVIEW
COMMITTEE ON HISTORIC MITIGATION OF “LUSTRON”
HOUSEAT 602 LINCOLN DRIVE, AND AUTHORIZE
MAYOR TO EXECUTE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
A request from the Urban Development Office regarding the historic mitigation of “Lustron” house, 602 Lincoln Drive, with recommendation of approval of RFP review committee and, as appropriate, authorize Mayor to execute Memorandum of Agreement.
It was moved by Council Member Klave and seconded by Council Member Kreun that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 10 votes affirmative, Council Members Bjerke and Stevens voted against the motion.
COUNCIL MEMBER MARTINSON REPORTED BACK
TABLE ITEM REGARDING CONSTRUCTION OF A
RAILROAD BRIDGE BY BURLINGTON NORTHERN
SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY FOR ENGLISH COULEE
DIVERSION EXTENSION AT DeMERS AVENUE
The matter of construction of a railroad bridge by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) for the English Coulee Diversion extension at DeMers Avenue, with a recommendation to authorize the City officials to sign the construction and maintenance agreement with the BNSF for the DeMers Avenue crossing, contingent upon review and approval by the city attorney and staff.
Council Member Kreun asked if there had been further discussion with Burlington Northern on the area of the City being responsible for the work with Burlington Northern supervising with their staff and contract crews. Mr. Grotte stated that the city attorney was reviewing the agreement and have not had any additional discussions. Mr. Swanson stated that the proposal in the agreement essentially force the City to be responsible for maintenance of the bridge, that the Railroad has presented it that way in a take it or leave it position; that they can try to do more negotiations with them and try to massage the language as to that repairs or maintenance reasonably necessary or with approval, but that under the circumstances the Railroad has not been open to significant negotiations on the item that they present. Council Member Kreun stated his concern and if there was some way to put some limitations or prior approval so that the City can understand and budget for this kind of repair. Mr. Swanson stated they can go back and specifically request prior approval or bidding requirements, and can come back with that and advised the council to table the issue.
It was moved by Council Member Klave and seconded by Council Member Christensen to table this matter. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3881, AMENDING ARTICLE 2
OF CHAPTER XIV OF THE GRAND FORKS CITY CODE
RELATING TO CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PARKING
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance amending Article 2 of Chapter XIV of the Grand Forks City Code relating to Central Business District parking”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on November 20, 2000, and which had been continued until this evening, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
A staff report from the Urban Development Office relating to ordinance amending Article 2 of Chapter XIV of the Grand Forks City Code relating to the Central Business District, with a recommendation to approve the amendment to Article 2 of Chapter XIV of the Grand Forks City Code that transfers the duties and powers of the Downtown Parking Authority to the city council, and to direct staff to work with the City Attorney’s Office to restructure the Municipal Parking System, was presented and read.
Council Member Christensen stated that Exhibit A that was attached to the ordinance is not what they should be voting on, and presented map showing the appropriate parking lots which should be included in Exhibit A - lots at North 5th Street and 1st Avenue North, at South 4th Street and Division Avenue, and civic auditorium lot at 600 block 1st Avenue North because have to do maintenance and were not included in the district and people who use it would not be assessed, and suggested including those three lots.
Council Member Hamerlik asked if the civic center parking lot now maintained by the School District and to include in the district would be an implication that we’re going to do it in the future, and that he understands that they’re helping because of the special assessments, that the lease is for $1.00 year and helping with special assessments so they are putting in approx. $10,000/year. Council Member Christensen stated he wasn’t sure that was currently how it is being handled according to staff’s memo; that what we are voting on is taking back the authority to manage and maintain the parking downtown and the parking ramps, but the ordinance that was amended had a boundary description of streets and that Exhibit A was the existing outline of those streets and he is suggesting that we add the parking lots that weren’t there when the first ordinance was drafted, just pick up three lots. Mayor Brown asked for a motion with that amendment.
It was so moved by Council Member Christensen and seconded by Council Member Brooks that Exhibit A of the ordinance be amended to include the three lots as noted. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
Upon call for the question of adoption of the ordinance, as amended, including Exhibit A, and upon roll call vote the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Kreun, Martinson - 13; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the ordinance adopted.
RECEIVE AND FILE MATTER OF LOGO FOR THE
CENTRAL-BUSINESS DISTRICT WATER TOWER
The matter of the logo for the Central Business District water tower, with recommendation that action be determined by the city council, and information reported per city council request.
It was moved by Council Member Martinson and seconded by Council Member Kreun to receive and file the information. Carried 13 votes affirmative.
INTRODUCE ORDINANCE TO MERGE THE ALERUS
CENTER WITH THE GREATER GRAND FORKS CONVENTION
AND VISITORS BUREAU
The matter of the first reading of the ordinance amendment to merge the Alerus Center with the Greater Grand Forks Convention and Visitors Bureau, with a recommendation to pass the first reading to the ordinance was presented.
Council Member Burke reported that several members of the current CVB have asked that this be tabled and that he thought that was consistent with the discussion they had in their meeting of February 16 in which it was said that they would have a working group work on the details of the merger before they got to the first reading of the ordinance, that a primary concern was the relationship of Compass Management with the new responsibilities of providing the services of the CVB, and moved to table this matter. The motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion was defeated, with Council Members Burke and Martinson voting for the motion.
Council Member Gershman stated he was at that meeting and understood that there would a first reading and wanted it held off until March 5 and agreed to that, that they can go forward with the first reading and that the work on the business plan and discussions can go forward.
Mr. Warne stated another thing that was agreed to was that there was consensus regarding the ordinance provided, that there were two amendments - l) is that they would not act until March 5 and 2) was that the current executive committee of the Convention & Visitors Bureau would become ex officio members of the new CVB Board until December 31, 2001, which would assist with whatever transition would be made and also the development of any strategic plan and business plan, and with that he met with the city attorney and that the draft ordinance included in the council binder does have that amendment in it, in Section 24-0303, and that their recommendation would be to proceed with first reading and at the same time move forward in the other areas.
Council Member Burke stated the point of holding off until March 5 rather than taking this up for first reading in February was to start having those meetings and work out some of the details, but haven’t had any of those meetings.
Mr. Warne stated that the way the ordinance is structured is to allow that dialogue in the preparation of those plans to actually take place, what doing is making their executive committee ex officio members of this Board to assist with the transition, and would submit that it’s probably in the best interest of the city as well as both organizations that we get this new board formed, that we get a representative from the Engelstad, a representative from the Park District and also from East Grand Forks and put them in place along with the ex officio members and then move forward into the business plan and the strategic plan so that you allow those that will have to execute the plan all the players be involved in the reparation of the plan, and strongly recommended that this be passed and do second reading in two weeks so that they can get that board put in place and move forward.