Council Minutes
17551
M
ay 7, 2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
May 7, 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, May 7, 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, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; absent: Council Members Lunak, Martinson - 2.
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 announced that the meeting is being televised.
Mayor Brown read a communication from Congressman Earl Pomeroy which was received April 30, 2001, stating that as he watched the communities on the Mississippi fight the floods that he reflects on how fortunate we are in North Dakota to have the outstanding local leadership we have in our flood prone cities. Congratulations on the successful fight you led this year on behalf of your community. As always it was his pleasure to work with you and he looks forward to future collaboration on issues more lasting than temporary dikes. Sincerely, Earl Pomeroy.
Mayor Brown announced that Bev Collings, Inspections Department, has been recognized for her efforts in the floodplain management which has resulted in 5% additional savings in the flood insurance rates for the entire community; that Ms. Collings has spearheaded this effort for many years and has resulted in one of the best ratings in the entire country. Ms. Collings, Inspections Department, stated she didn’t accomplish this by herself and recognized the people in the department and other departments that have helped in getting this rating and that it is a total effort by the City to achieve that. She stated that the community rating system is a program that was developed by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to encourage communities to inform their citizens about floodplain issues and to educate them, that much of the program is education, public relations and keeping information so that the public has a place to go for the information.
Mayor Brown read a letter of appreciation from Joe Albaugh, FEMA Director, thanking him and the council for making his visit to Grand Forks so informative, that he has a greater understanding of the issues that face those affected by the floods and his intention is to solve the outstanding issues as quickly as possible; and continued cooperation will be appreciated.
Mayor Brown presented plaque to former council member Laverne Babinchak, Ward 6, in appreciation of her years of dedicated service as a member of the Grand Forks city council, June, 1994 to January, 2001. He thanked her personally as well as mayor for all that she did during those years of service. Ms. Babinchak thanked the mayor and current council members and also thanked the former mayors that she worked with, former council members, constituents who supported her and the city employees.
ADOPT RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING CONTINUED
AMTRAK SERVICE ON NORTH DAKOTA’S NORTHERN
ROUTE
The deputy city auditor read the proposed resolution encouraging continued Amtrak service on North Dakota’s northern route: Document No. 8073 - Resolution.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Gershman to pass this resolution unanimously encouraging Burlington Northern/Santa Fe Railway to work with State and Federal governments to develop a solution to continue passenger service on the northern route. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
Mayor Brown asked that three city council members to serve on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Amtrak task force, that Council Member Lunak has offered to serve on this along with two staff members, the city engineer and the city planner, and asked to let his office know by Wednesday.
FLOOD REPORT
Al Grasser, city engineer, reviewed the May 7 flood update and this is the permanent flood protection plan:
Technical Work Update:
Through the Corps of Engineers Stanley Consultants has completed the Phase I levee plans and specifications, the Corps will be advertising for that project this month.
English Coulee Diversion project was scheduled for May 10 bid opening but will be delayed for about one week while work continues on land acquisition and plan updates.
Ayres Associates is a subcontractor for the Corps and are working on the design of the English Coulee pumping station to be constructed north of RDO Foods, design was delayed due to moving of the pump station because of geotechnical reasons, the revised right of way drawings have been received and appraisals are underway and expect the station to be operational by spring of 2003 for runoff period.
Quality Flow is a pump contractor (pumps for pumping stations in the flood protection project) and will begin shipment of pumps in July, September completion. The generator supply contract has been executed and will provide emergency generators at those stations. The Corps is negotiating with ICS as a sole source contractor to provide the control packages, process where the remote stations will communi-cate back to the water treatment plant, and network has to fit within our current communications system.
The North Dakota Department of Health has approved the plans and specs. for the new water intake, this project will not be operational until 2003, bids will be let upon receiving an easement from East Grand Forks to reach out to the Red Lake River intakes.
City Staff Update:
The construction is still underway on Lift Stations 1 and 5, Lincoln Park area and near St. Anne’s Guest Home, overall construction about 50% complete.
Bids were opened on April 16 for the contract to terminate and reroute water and sanitary sewer mains on the dry side of the levee in Phase I areas; award scheduled for this evening’s meeting, it’s a City responsibility to be doing the utility relocates prior to the Corps contractor coming in.
Removal of streets and utilities in Riverside and Lincoln areas was contracted with Gowan Construction, the streets have been removed in Riverside area; the street removal in Lincoln Park area is expected to begin in May but will ask the contractor to delay some of the street removal in Lincoln Park area pending review of the timing sequence on the Corps Phase I project, because they found in this year’s flood fight it was very useful to have a borrow pit that was accessible at high water levels and want to make sure that we have that available for spring flood fight until 2002.
He stated that on the federal level the fiscal year 2002 is currently in the House Appropriations Committee, budget contains $25 million, which is $10 million less than desired by both cities, our Congressional delegations are working on trying to get the $10 million back into the budget.
Acquisitions:
Staff is involved with project acquisitions as is the city attorney’s staff, are trying to field a lot of questions as get down to final moments of acquisition from property owners, that accelerated schedule is not giving people a lot of time to consider the sales options and because of our time crunches with the bidding process, are moving into eminent domain with a number of these properties.
Phase II:
He stated they are working on that project, there are eight homes needed with this phase along with twenty partial acquisitions, several previously purchased homes in this area have been sold and four more sold on May 2, hoping that will have the purchased houses removed by this fall, through the property owner moving the house or through property demolition - to get everything ready for the Corps project which will start next spring; that utility relocates being the City’s responsibility, will be relocating utilities in those areas this fall.
Southend Update:
The Barr Phase II study for the southeast levee alignment alternative was received on March 27 and has been distributed; a meeting of staff, Sr. leadership and County reps. was held on April 25, and upon receipt of comments from the regulatory agencies, the options that can potentially be implemented will be determined and decision process will continue. He stated that means that some of the alternative alignments on the far southend do show some hydraulic impacts to the river and need to be dealing with DNR, State Water Commission to determine what impacts they will allow as the regulatory agencies that may indicate to us whether some alternatives are in fact viable or not.
He stated they are investigating some additional floodwall options and working with some of the property owners on the amenities on the southend alignments and actually the floodwall options will be applicable to both Sunbeam area, Reeves Drive area and the northend area, and trying to bring more alternatives for the citizens to look at, that they are planning to have the Corps come in early July to do presentations on the floodwall alternatives they’ve worked up with their landscape designer.
Council Member Christensen stated he had talked with Mr. Grasser regarding asking someone from the Corps who is experienced in designing floodwalls to be available to the residents who are asked to give opinions regarding the type of floodwall they want - that residents may design floodwalls that may have an expanse of close to a mile in the city, concrete edifices, and that if the Corps is going to give a presentation in July with only three choices - and it seems to him as they have $6.5 million for enhancements and the Corps is paying for the architect for the floodwalls and that our community should make some of our resources available so that people who are asked to make a decision on the three floodwalls that are presented by the Corps probably have some input between now and July so they have proper perspective - that there are maybe 50 different types of floodwall designs they could pursue, and if we have to allocate $30,000 to hire our own landscape architect to assist our residents in this process, would like to do that sooner so that we have this information available so citizens will have some help in making those decisions.
Council Member Gershman stated there was a meeting with the architects from the Corps with the neighborhoods affected, and each neighborhood does have a book of the types of things we can do but there was also an offer made that we could design our own on a certain reach - that we have the ability to design our own walls, but that they don’t want to have 30 different sections of walls, and there have been meetings in various neighborhoods. Council Member Christensen stated that he is suggesting that staff secure more information available to the citizens so they are better informed as to what their selections are before confronted with the three choices the Corps is going to give them in July. Mr. Grasser stated that what they are working on now accomplishes those goals, doing some research to find out if they can put together a catalogue or scrapbook of different alternative things that have been done, that he went through some of the information they have in the office and citizenry needs some pictures of what designs look like in place and their office will try to help facilitate some of that and get done in an efficient cost effective manner, and do understand that there’s some expediency needed here. He stated their plan is to make these options available so people can review.
Melanie Parvey-Biby, Interim Greenway Coordinator, stated that the council does receive a Greenway Update every month in addition to the Flood Protection Update, and reviewed a more detailed description of the Nature Center and the planning efforts that have been done to date. She stated that the Nature Center is included in the Greenway Plan, which was approved by council in December, 1999. It is a conceptual plan that includes ideas of amenities that could be included in the Greenway - location of the Nature Center is proposed in the south part of Grand Forks near the Belmont Coulee (north of Sunbeam Park). She stated that the Greenway will be developed along with the flood protection project and the Nature Center is in the section of the Greenway that is part of Phase II levee development. Since Phase II levee construction is planned for 2002-2003, design for this is underway for the levees and the recreation features in this area; the recreational features in this area include a trail head facility which is a restroom and a parking lot, if a nature center would be added to this area Corps could possibly cost share on the restroom and the parking lot facility so there is some advantage to adding it now. In February staff put together a group of technical advisors to see the merits of whether or not it was possible to put a nature center in Grand Forks and to see what resources various organizations could contribute. Some of the ideas this group came up with are listed in the update, and potential users include very young children to very old adults , school children, local residents, disabled, tourists and our future generations. She stated some of the facility options that came about out of discussions with the technical group included a one or two story building with offices, meeting rooms, restrooms, a possible observation deck since this building would be near the flood protection levee system, having an ADA accessibility multi-purpose classroom with a divider, some of the other amenities that were listed under this area included indoor/outdoor exhibits, interactive self interpretive panels, outdoor theatres or classrooms and computer terminal accessibility. Another thing that was identified that would be important to include was transportation as part of the operations budget which could be cost-shared with other centers in the area such as the Minnesota DNR Center that will be going up in East Grand Forks. School teachers expressed concern for the transportation because they are only allowed one field trip a year, which prohibits using facilities like this over and over again. This group also talked about possible programming that this facility could have, and programming dependent upon size of the building and will determine how many people will visit this type of center (classrooms for school children, community center).
Some of the other things that came out of the planning meetings included partnership possibilities, the City of Grand Forks could provide the site and facility along with the recreational amenities, the Audubon Society expressed interest in partnering with the City for on-going operations and maintenance along with a full-time staff at the Center. Dakota Science Center expressed interest in using the center and helping to program it, also ND Game & Fish, Soil Conservation District - ND Game & Fish is currently looking at placing an outreach biologist in this area, and this person would work on education and public relations, the center could possibly provide offices for agencies that wanted to place staff in this area.
She stated that the next phase on nature center planning is to put together a couple public meetings to discuss these ideas with the community and the neighborhood; the first meeting is tentatively set for May 17, with another meeting following in July - during this time they would need to get letters of commitment from possible agencies that would be willing to partner along with council involvement, there would need to be a commitment or authorization from the council to include this type of center along with Phase II development of the greenway project.
Council Member Burke stated that authorization of the council to include the nature center with Phase II development August 6, 2001 - what would we have to decide at that point, to go ahead with the whole project or allow for the ground to be prepared for potential nature center. Ms. Parvey-Biby stated either, to have the nature center to include additional building with the trailhead facility would be a betterment so the council would need to approve that - so would have to go with whole project (nature center) by August of this year. Council Member Burke asked if they would have commitments of funding and operations money from the various entities by then. Ms. Parvey-Biby stated the plan was to obtain commitment from these agencies that they are willing to continue to partner, that there could be a chance to include the nature center at a later date, but to enable use of Corps funding with these recreational features would have to be included with the Phase II development and design. She stated that hopefully the commitments would be made before the commitment of the council.
Council Member Glassheim asked if there would be further updates on what we are talking about, how much and likelihood of other participation. Ms. Biby stated there would be updates along with the planning process and community involvement.
Mr. Grasser stated that the August date isn’t the last opportunity to comment on this, but it’s a milepost where we have to authorize that they start expending the funds to do the design and bidding, but we will still have the option when the bidding is done to break out those bids and review before doing a final award.
Council Member Burke stated that the capital costs are only part of his concern, to construct a building and not know what it’s going to cost to operate it, or staff it, or who’s going to do it, or relationships are going to be in any certain way - understands that people may give letters of support but we could end up with a building and we become the programmer of it, staff it, and becomes an on-going cost - and that’s his real concern.
Council Member Klave asked how large an area would be notified for these public meetings, that all residents understand what’s happening. Ms. Biby stated the area they identified for notification was south of 32nd and east of Belmont Road to 49th, and an area south of Terrace Drive - notification will be put in the paper and notices to the media to let community know. Council Member Klave suggested going east of Cherry Street and include SunBeam in that notification area.
Council Member Christensen stated he reviewed the minutes of past meetings, that people are talking that it’s going to have educational value and commitment, and that a lot of people coming to the meetings are teachers and touted as an educational experience for our children, and would be interested in seeing the School District step up and make a commitment to the funding and staffing of this so that it would be a jointly owned project and/or a jointly funded and staff project going forward so that it isn’t something that falls back in our lap two or three years from now, or the Audubon can’t fund it - and he would be very interested in making sure that we know who is going to staff it, because it appears we’re moving towards a full time staff person or two and still have to fund it which equates to one mill and would like to make sure we have a good handle sooner of what costs of maintaining and operating this would be and asked that they have that to us as early as July 1, as well as what kind of commitments we’re going to get from other entities in this community - and questioned involvement from Park District. Ms. Biby stated the Park District staff was invited to the meetings, although in discussions with staff, the Park Superintendent stated they had a good group of people put together to discuss the matter. Council Member Christensen stated that as they approach these betterments, understand what it is going to cost us going forward and who is going to pay.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3884, RELATING TO USE
OF PUBLIC SEWERS
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance amending Section 15-0204 of the Grand Forks City Code relating to use of public sewers”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on April 16, 2001, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
Upon call for the question and upon roll call vote the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the ordinance adopted.
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3885, RELATING TO APPEAL
FROM DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION
An ordinance entitled “An ordinance amending Section 18-0311(10) of the Grand Forks City Code heretofore effective relating to appeal from Downtown Design Review Board action”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on April 2, 2001, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.
Council Member Glassheim stated that if the city council does become the board of hearing of last resort that they will try to put on more of a planning hat than a political hat, that the point of putting them into planning was so that the well-being of the whole look of the downtown would be considered and not any individual property owner having too much weight, and if things do come up that the council will treat it as trying to do the best for the whole downtown. Council Member Kreun noted that there were other city council members on that particular board because it was stated that it was not being represented by elected officials, but Planning and Zoning Commission is made up of Park Board people, School Board, County Commissioners and city council members, and majority of that board is made up by elected officials.
Upon call for the question and upon roll call vote he following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the ordinance adopted.
APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR ABATEMENT OF 1999
AND 2000 TAXES AT 815 DUKE DRIVE, #105
The staff recommendation from the assessor’s office relating to applications for abatement for 1999 and 2000 taxes by John Hoffman, 815 Duke Drive, Unit #5, with recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners that the applications be approved as submitted.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved, and further that we adopt the findings, conclusions and recommendations as prepared by the city attorney. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT
The staff recommendation from the assessor’s office relating to budget amendment, transfer from cash carryover in Temporary Wages in Assessing Department, with recommendation to approve budget amendment of $12,056.80. It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
APPROVE APPLICATION FOR MOVING PERMIT TO
MOVE HOUSE FROM 207 HUGHES COURT TO 561
EVERGREEN DRIVE
The staff recommendation from the building inspections office relating to moving permit application to move the house from 207 Hughes Court to 561 Evergreen Drive, with recommendation to hold the public hearing on the issue of moving a house from 207 Hughes Court to 561 Evergreen Drive.
Mayor Brown called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved and further that the applicant, Robert Kvistad, be and is hereby authorized to move the building, subject to meeting conditions established. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
APPROVE APPLICATION FOR MOVING PERMIT TO
MOVE HOUSE FROM 203 HUGHES COURT TO 573
EVERGREEN DRIVE
The staff recommendation from the building inspections office relating to moving permit application to move the house from 203 Hughes Court to 573 Evergreen Drive, with recommendation to hold the public hearing on the issue of moving a house from 203 Hughes Court to 573 Evergreen Drive.
Mayor Brown called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved and further that the applicant, Rick Vari, be and is hereby authorized to move the building, subject to meeting conditions established. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
APPROVE APPLICATION FOR MOVING PERMIT TO
MOVE HOUSE FROM 109 GRASSY HILLS TO 2401 SOUTH
36TH STREET
The staff recommendation of the building inspections office relating to moving permit application to move the house from 109 Grassy Hills to 2401 South 36th Street, with recommendation to hold the public hearing on the issue of moving a house from 109 Grassy Hills to 2401 South 36th Street.
Mayor Brown called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had commons to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved and further that the applicant, Wally Rogers, be and is hereby authorized to move the building, subject to meeting conditions established. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
APPROVE APPLICATION FOR MOVING PERMIT TO
MOVE HOUSE FROM 4619 LOAMY HILLS TO 3675
SOUTH 38TH STREET
The staff recommendation from the building inspections office relating to moving permit application to move the house from 4619 Loamy Hills to 3675 South 38th Street, with recommendation to hold the public hearing on the issue of moving a house from 4619 Loamy Hills to 2675 South 38th Street.
Mayor Brown called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved and further that the applicant, Wally Rogers, be and is hereby authorized to move the building, subject to meeting conditions established. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
AWARD BIDS FOR CITY PROJECTS NOS. 4815 AND
4816.1, SANITARY SEWER AND WATER SYSTEM
MODIFICATIONS
The staff recommendation from the engineering department relating to consideration of bids for City Project Nos. 4815 and 4816.1, Sanitary Sewer and Water System Modifications, with recommendation to approve award of a contract to the lowest responsible bidder from bid opening on April 16, 2001 at 2:00 p.m. at City Hall.
A communication from Webster, Foster & Weston, consulting engineers, relative to Sanitary Sewer and Water System Modifications, Projects Nos. 4815 and 4816.1, including a tabulation of bids received, and recommending that a unit price contract be awarded to United Crane & Excavation, Inc. in the amount of $209,771.59, as the lowest responsible responsive bid.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved, and that the unit price contract be awarded to United Crane & Excavation, Inc. in the amount of $209,771.59. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
ACCEPT LOW BIDS FOR EQUIPMENT FOR STREET
DEPARTMENT
The staff recommendation from public works relating to matter of approval of bid on emulsion tank, with recommendation to approve Northwestern Equipment, Inc. bid of $9,900.00 as the lowest and best bid.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved, and that the bid of Northwestern Equipment, Inc. in the amount of $9,900.00 be accepted. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
The staff recommendation from public works relating to matter of approval of bid for melter/applicator, with recommendation to approve the Swanston Equipment Corporation bid of $26,775.00 as the lowest and best bid.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved, and that the bid of Swanston Equipment Corporation in the amount of $26,775.00 be accepted. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
The staff recommendation from the public works department relating to the matter of approval of bid on the 4 yd. payloader, with recommendation to not open the bid of RDO Equipment Company due to the failure to acknowledge Addendum #1 on the front of the bid envelope or include a signed copy of the Addendum in the bid bond envelope; and to approve the Butler Machinery Company bid as the lowest and best bid with an annual cost of $22,939.00.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that this recommendation be and is hereby approved, and to accept the bid of Butler Machinery Company with an annual cost of $22,939.00. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun - 12; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.
APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS FOR HEALTH
DEPARTMENT
A staff recommendation from the health department relating to budget amendment (HL10, $5,000, 4/17/01) for Communicable Disease Grant with the North Dakota Department of Health, with recommendation to approve the budget amendment ($5,000) for Communicable Disease Grant (#F01-42) with the North Dakota Department of Health (new 2001 revenue).
A staff recommendation from the health department relating to budget amendment (HL15, $7,042, 4/16/01, 2000 Cash Carryover) for the Community Initiative Grant Program, with recommendation to approve budget amendment ($7,042) for the Community Initiative Grant Program.
A staff recommendation from the health department relating to budget amendment (HL25, $10,000, 4/16/01, Technical Correction) for the Care Coordination Grant Program, with recommendation to approve the budget amendment ($10,000) for the Care Coordination Grant Program.
It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Kerian that these budget amendments be and are hereby approved. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
REJECT APPLICATION FOR PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION
BY AUTO WORLD, 210 NORTH WASHINGTON STREET
A staff recommendation from the assessing department relating to application for property tax exemption by Auto World at 210 North Washington Street (new or expanding business), with recommendation to consider feasibility of such an exemption, and if plans are to go forward, then set a date for public hearing.
It was moved by Council Member Bjerke and seconded by Council Member Stevens to reject the application and request for property tax exemption by Auto World at 210 North Washington Street. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
TABLE 2-YEAR PROPERTY TAX EXEPTION FOR NEW
HOUSING
A staff recommendation from the assessing department relating to 2-year property tax exemption for new homes, with recommendation to consider the implementation of 2-year new home exemption.
Council Member Burke stated they had received a lot of material in support of the exemption, most of it speaks to the economic development from building homes, but that he hasn’t seen anything that actually explains how effective this incentive is in creating new home construction; that it simply addresses the fact that if we build so many homes this will be the economic impact, and asked how the tax abatement would actually generate additional new home construction.
Council Member Kreun stated he thinks we should look at this from perspective of home ownership, Grand Forks has low home ownership, some of that is due to University area; that he brought this up because it could be one of the tools for building homes and community back to the numbers we need. He stated we have current programs - 3 at this particular time, and another 5 listed as proposed programs and that group of people should put together (2 from School District, 2 from Park District and 2 from city council) to see if can bring these together in a complete package as to what we can offer to the citizens of Grand Forks and people outside the community. He noted that for low to moderate owner/occupied households, Home Buyer’s Assistance program (LMI as well): Home Buyer’s Assistance for non-LMI families and was thinking could go from 80 to 120% of median income level, and work with Mr. Hanson and Mark Krauseneck as to how to fund some of these programs. He noted we have in-fill housing program and could use lots owned by the City and utilize the existing infrastructure that is already there and utilize that for down-payment or less cost if non-profit homeowner or a developer or however that wants to be designed; that he listed the home buyer tax abatement program so there are a list of items that are proposed. He noted that there are previous programs that we’ve had and maybe want to implement some of those - want to offer a variety of programs so that it can take pre-existing homeowners, pre-owned homes and utilize those so that have a complete spectrum of our community. He stated that the EDC is out marketing jobs on the web site and if we put a package together as far as marketing homes along with jobs on web site we could put together a complete package for Grand Forks to entice people to move here for jobs as well as homeownership. He stated that the new home tax exemption is a tool in the toolbox to use and would like to start that at this time but to put together a complete program at some point in time.
Doug Carpenter, 1260 Burbank Circle, stated disappointment at the lack of opportunity for public discussion in advance about this issue, that it was talked briefly at the last committee of the whole meeting but the general public didn’t know it as committee of the whole agendas aren’t published. He stated he is opposed to a general 2-year property tax exemption, thinks it’s an inefficient way of enticing growth, that most of the people that take advantage of it would be building anyway; no evidence that it is effective, one of the predominant things that make people determine if build a house is interest rates, that’s a permanent reduction if rates are low. He stated he doesn’t think this does anything for affordable housing if it’s a general across the board exemption; that there are a lot of lesser priced homes on the market right now. He stated he thinks there should be some discussion and potential support for a program that allows an exemption for somebody that moves to the community, want to attract people to Grand Forks for jobs, want to grow the community, program that might be in place for them and see actual results - could make that exemption available if somebody buys an existing house, and something that could get people here if they could help support the moving costs by not having to pay taxes for a couple years - drawback is money coming out of the budget that’s existing today and may have to have legislative approval - and those are issues that should have been talked about before the legislative session and if serious about attracting new people should be having a public discussion. He stated there is discussion about affordable housing and if want to talk about a tax exemption for “affordable” houses maybe the exemption should be limited to $125,000 or less to actually encourage growth in that area, and make more houses available that people can get out of apartments. He stated in the area he lives in, there are 8 basements that have been dug this spring, new houses are going up, basements are being poured, and asked if this is needed. He stated if they put this program in place put a sunset provision on it - it actually is an incentive and if leave it there all the time it becomes factored into the cost and no longer an incentive - shouldn’t be retroactive - and thinks this program is something that interferes with the market place and inefficient and shouldn’t have it - and if a program should be limited to who the availability is to it.
Council Member Hamerlik stated that they talked about affordable housing, have had study and should look at it and then put a package together, not in favor of piecemeal , but should have a plan and if enough items in the program, might be saleable. He stated that in receiving calls and people talking to him, no one in favor of the program except home builders and real estate people. He commented on the current number of houses on the market in the city - one way to get housing down is come down in price and if we build more homes will have another glut, that we were accused of that with Congressional; that he thinks the majority of people in apartments are not going to go out and build $150,000, $200,000 houses but more apt to move into one of the 310 houses for sale and that of the 310 houses there should be enough for people who want to move to Grand Forks, it isn’t as though we don’t have housing, it’s either the price or our tax structure, etc. and if encourage people to move in, a $5,000 incentive will be of some help, but have a package that they can modify or presentable motion that we can see what we’re going to do.
Council Member Gershman stated that he is in favor of this, that people who would get exemption would reinvest that money in their home , buy something else for it (carpet, increase value of their home). He stated that if approve program, that homes would qualify at completion date; and agrees with sunset on the program - do for five years and quantify what we’re doing.
Council Member Brooks addressed this item from the podium - stated that at the committee of the whole meeting discussion brought out that we needed this program to compete with East Grand Forks, Thompson and small cities around, that he doesn’t think he has a conflict of interest but because of that he will ask to abstain from vote on this - but as a citizen wants to address it - that he thinks that Grand Forks is a leader in our metropolitan area and taking this action with reasons publicly stated because we’re competing with the small towns around us, everyone who moves to these small towns helps bring up the economy of Grand Forks and that we need their economic input to survive in this metropolitan area - but we need to be looking at bringing businesses in, not going to bring people here to retire - people who come here to buy a house come here because of a job, and need to look at economic development for this town, and need to put that together - then look at housing and total picture.
Council Member Kreun stated we are not just talking affordable housing, want to create an atmosphere for all citizens of Grand Forks, that interest rates haven’t been spurring home building and has to be something else that does that, want to supply programs for every entity and also think supply and demand will dictate to building, this is just an incentive; and that he doesn’t think we’re competing with other communities but is an offering that we want to be a leader in the region and offer all the citizens plus people from outside the area to come to Grand Forks and be able to build here and have a higher quality of life. He stated that the proposed programs fit in all the economic levels of the individuals and want a complete program to put together, and is willing to wait to put into the program.
Council Member Glassheim stated he reviewed building starts in the city (as well as East Grand Forks and surrounding communities), considered interest rates and amount of exemption and couldn’t find any conclusion except that the housing starts seem to track interest rates; that if want to spend money attracting people to the city or to make a marketing package, in favor, but take it out of economic development not property taxes - that 95% of people who live here are in houses and this is an unfair advantage to new houses as opposed to those who might be selling their houses; that if builders want to take 2% off the cost of building or land owners take couple percent off the cost of the land in order to give the people the incentive to build new house, in favor.
Tim Lamb, 1704 Belmont Road, spoke in favor of the 2-year tax exemption, that there’s a danger in over analyzing - that the Legislature has provided this program to cities who want to take advantage of it, thinks that with the interest rates being low, lumber at a low and this incentive will be the trigger for incentives for new house starts, last year had an all time low in the community and does send a message to people who are thinking about building a new house, and urged the council to pass and put in effect.