Council Minutes
17727
August 30, 2001
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
August 30, 2001
The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in special session in the council chambers in City Hall on Thursday, August 30, 2001 at the hour of 7:00 o’clock p.m. with President Gershman presiding, pursuant to call by Mayor Brown, which was served on all members of the city council on August 27, 2001. Present at roll call were Council Members Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik (teleconference system), Burke, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Gershman - 11; absent: Council Member Brooks, Glassheim, Lunak - 3.
President Gershman 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 that the meeting is being televised but not recorded for later replay.
CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE FLOOD PROTECTION ALIGN-
MENT REQUESTS SOUTH OF CITY; AND AFFIRM THE
CURRENT CORPS OF ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED FLOOD
PROTECTION ALIGNMENT
Mark Lambrecht, CPS, serving on the City’s flood protection staff, made a brief presentation, stating that there are three separate neighborhoods associated with the area in question - southeast of the city of Grand Forks and between the Corps’ proposed flood protection alignment and the Red River. He stated there are about 100 homes in that area (about mile and half between the Corps’ alignment and the river), and that they will be talking about these neighborhoods individually and pointed out the areas on a map - in the northerly end of the area is the Shadyridge Subdivision (a portion is within the city limits) and south of that a large area of undeveloped land; 2) that along the west side of the lake an area called the Burke Addition (Country View Neighborhood Association) and 3) to the east of that area and east of the lake and over to the Red River is the East Lake Estates and each are distinct groups with their residents sharing a common thought about flood protection. He reported that information has been disseminated at different times and most recently the main document that was presented was the Barr study which was an extensive study of hydraulics, geotechnical; these potential alignments, including costs, and the funding for the study was two-thirds by the City and one-third by the County to help in the decision making process. He reported that handouts had been distributed, the staff report along with letters from the various neighborhoods indicating their wishes. He stated an important point to keep in mind tonight is that our flood protection project is on an extremely aggressive schedule and are considering these alternative alignments, but for any of them to be added to the Corps of Engineers project a supplemental environmental impact statement would need to be done and if we wish the federal government to consider funding of our project, we would need to go through a post-authorization change report; and those two items would take about 18 months of time before final design could be embarked upon, and if we are to complete our project by 2004 a decision must be forthcoming almost immediately. He stated that the three neighborhoods have requested different alignments: the Burke Addition (County View Neighborhood Association) desires the alignment closest to the Red River (blue line on map) and in their letter to the City they also indicate they do not desire annexation to the city and are willing to pay the same amount for flood protection as city residents pay in special assessments (formula that has a per front foot cost for special assessments); 2) the East Lake area (between the lake and the Red River) did not present a formal letter as of late but their previous indications are they prefer the alignment as far west as possible (green line) and those properties are larger acreages and the individuals have indicated that they have sufficient acreage to build their own flood protection on their own property and therefore do not feel the need for the city alignment and desire an alignment as far away from them as possible. The Shadyridge area is a smaller group of people but with a larger acreage of land and they desire something similar to the (yellow or orange) alignments which could protect a good portion of the land and being in closest proximity to the city, and that the land to which development is most imminent. The Barr Report pointed out that all of the alternative alignments would be more expensive than the current alignment and that it is likely the Corps would determine that these costs would be a betterment, that our project costs would not be applicable to it unless we went through a very substantial process of our congressional delegation helping us out in that regard. He stated that the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement which would take several months to complete, the Corps of Engineers maintains and the reason why they selected their current line (green line) is that the project as currently designed is designed such that it doesn’t raise future flooding levels for any particular intensity of flood to higher levels than exist today within a very narrow range of tolerance to which that would occur. He stated that most of the recent comments received from the neighborhoods are in response to a June meeting held in these chambers and subsequently city staff went to a meeting in the neighborhoods and helped to disseminate information.
President Gershman asked if there were any questions of Mr. Lambrecht from the city council; there were no comments; and President Gershman asked for citizen comments.
Al Bott, 6402 Lake Drive, representing the Country View Neighborhood Association, stated that a communication had been sent to the citizens and residents of the Association and distributed to the council members asking the council several questions: 1) that the majority of the residents affected in this area want to be on the dry side of the dike; 2) has the Army Corps ever been asked in writing to establish a dike line farther east from the green line (Corps line) that would protect the 100 homes affected by that line; 3) that the report states that the project as designed does not raise the water surface elevation for properties in this area on the unprotected side, that the City dike will not raise the water level above that of 1997 and that the water will not come beyond that as result of this dike; and 4) that the report does mention the issue of annexation and that the City has the capacity to annex territory going into the master plan for the growth and progression of the city, however, despite the flood protection if they were going to have a master plan for the city and were going to expand the city either southward or westward and were going to annex territories, what would be the timetable of annexing the Burke Addition
Mr. Lambrecht stated they have not requested the Corps to establish an alternate dike alignment in writing, that would be the result of the meeting tonight if such an action were requested of the Corps, but it has not been done. Mr. Bott also asked if the City has asked the Corps in writing if it will incorporate the blue or yellow lines proposed by the Barr report, and if it would be considered by the Corps if it is a betterment or not is simply up in the air because there’s been no request in writing for a dike to protect them. Council Member Martinson stated he wasn’t sure it was the City’s responsibility but rather if the County Commissioners have asked about a different alignment as their property is in the county. Mr. Bott stated when this started he went to one of the Corps members and asked how they would extend the line, they were referred to the County Commissioners, and County Commissioners stated that the City was in charge of the project and the request had to come from the City.
Council Member Kreun stated if you make this request which would come at this particular kind of meeting, that a request in writing would set off a process that requires a detailed study and lot of time and energy which is converted into cost, that the Corps of Engineers doesn’t do everything for nothing and they take this cost that would be directed towards the study of whichever line that we would ask them to study and deduct that possibly from cost of their share of the cost of the dike alignment and everything we asked them to do over and above what is outside the scope of the project cost a lot of money, and would not ask whether do each line each time in writing, and wouldn’t expect to do that until this group came to a consensus to ask what is the greatest ability to accomplish the goal and then ask that in writing. Mr. Bott asked why that was never extended to protect 100 residents in the extra-territorial jurisdiction; Council Member Kreun stated that there’s an assumption that the Corps’ line (green line) was arbitrarily brought down, there is some degree that line was brought down because of convenience in being able to tie in at the end, there’s also the cost of benefit ratio and when they took that into consideration that was part of the information that was used to make the decision into the green line - that the cost to benefit ratio and the ability for us to go out and control that area which is not in the city limits was not available to us at that time either, and made it more difficult to adjust that line any closer.
Mr. Grasser stated that money also translates into time and if we were to ask the Corps to go out and do these various studies we have an accelerated project that we’re trying to get completed by the end of 2003, and this is the most efficient way, dollars and also time and that was why the request would come after the neighborhood request consensus building and the city council determination.
Mr. Bott stated that the report states that the project as designed does not raise the water surface elevation for properties in this area on the unprotected side, that the City dike will not raise the water level above that of 1997 and that the water will not come beyond that as result of this dike. He stated that the Burke Addition is vulnerable to the flood level of 1997, which caused significant damage to many homes, and if it comes up to the flood level they will still be sending people out of their homes, and asked if any other neighborhood of 100 homes on the dike line been left open to this level of flooding, and if other property owners along the dike line been put on the wet side of the dike. Mr. Grasser stated that when saying that not raise water elevations, that is based on the engineering study, the goal of the Corps is that they not change water surface elevations and doesn’t necessarily mean zero point zero --, the area being it is unprotected is still vulnerable from a 1997 flood with or without a project, and clarified that a 1997 event should likely still have the same impact that it had in 1997 on this neighborhood because they were impacted, our project does not protect them. The issue on other neighborhoods that this neighborhood has significant high ground and independent utilities, it’s not in the print of the dike alignment, and not aware of any neighborhoods in town that were taken out, that they were taken out because they were severely damaged by the flood or in the footprint of the dike and not any comparable neighborhoods that they could make that comparison to.
Mr. Bott asked if hazard mitigation funds been requested to buy out low lying properties on Lake Drive in order to make room for a dike, that the hazard mitigation funds come from the State and/or the federal government and in some cases where people are in imminent danger of being flooded like they were in 1997, could a resort be made to this hazard mitigation fund to buy out and make room for a dike. Mr. Grasser stated there were hazard mitigation funds available after the 1997 event throughout the state, the City did apply and was successful in getting hazard mitigation dollars for buyouts in the city of Grand Forks; because this property is in the county, this would have been up to the County to apply for those mitigation grant funds, that the City wouldn’t have any jurisdiction to go out and ask for mitigating grant funds in the County, those programs are still available but doesn’t know what their availability is right now. Council Member Bakken stated that at one time during the process the City had even considered buying some of the homes on the east side of that addition and the response was that they wanted it on the blue line and didn’t want to lose those homes. Council Member Martinson stated that he was under the impression that they were going to build their own dikes, and asked if the County requested mitigation and for some financial assistance for the people in the Burke Addition which is not in the city of Grand Forks. Mr. Bott stated he did not know.
Mr. Bott stated that the fourth idea is that the report does mention the issue of annexation and that the City has the capacity to annex territory going into the master plan for the growth and progression of the city, however, despite the flood protection if they were going to have a master plan for the city and were going to expand the city either southward or westward and were going to annex territories, what would be the timetable of annexing the Burke Addition. Mr. Grasser stated much of annexation is spurred by development that wants to take place and those decisions would be made by the individual property owners; that in many aspects we are reactionary to what the developers want and City didn’t have a schedule per se. Council Member Martinson stated that if the Burke Addition did apply for annexation and want a change in the dike alignment, that would still fall under betterment. Mr. Bott stated that unless the City makes a request won’t know whether it’s a betterment or not, and the last point raised deals with legal concerns which the report does not address and asked if the city attorney in writing advised the City as to the possibility of liability for damages upon completion of the dike and if so, was the City advised in writing of possible amount of damages the City have to pay, and that this amount exceeds the amount required to build a dike to protect the homes in question. Mr. Swanson stated the confidentiality of attorney-client communications and would be inappropriate to respond to that question.
Eunice Kuhn, secretary of the Country View Neighborhood Association, in their letter of July 30, 2001, to the city council stated their position on the dike, they were asked to choose a dike line which is the blue line, and is the only line they could logically chose and yet protect as many people as possible with the lowest cost. She stated she knows there will be some form of monetary assessments, etc. but feel that would be the best line for them, that there’s a lot of people who really want to be on the dry side of the dike and 1997 was very devastating, only one home along the Coulee that was not flooded, and would like to have protection.
Jack Waters, relatively new resident in the Burke Addition (Country View Estates) and a member of the Board, stated he would like to reinforce what’s said, there are a lot of issues that the city council needs to look at that may go beyond what individual interest’s are in that area, that seems the City has a long term interest in. The City does need to consider very seriously - that they would like their home to be on the dry side of the dike and know it’s a very complicated matter and will not try to readdress the issues, that they have a split vote in the areas out there and there’s good reason for that and sees as something a little bigger than their individual interests and that should be a consideration.
Council Member Christensen stated it is his understanding that if the City were to grant protection when the people in the Burke Addition or Country View Neighborhood Assn. don’t want to be annexed and asked how the city council could face the citizens who live within the community and who pay real estate taxes. He stated that if the City were to adopt the blue line, it appears there’s no chance they would get the addition annexed .
President Gershman stated that if in fact changing the line and if the Corps did come to us and said there will not be a betterment, we still have $3 million that we would have to pay half, or $3 million more if part of the project and you’re asking us to spread that over the citizens of Grand Forks, very difficult situation, so the betterment issue is somewhat moot, would be less money but a lot more money than what we have right now.
Mr. Waters stated it was clear in the meeting he attended that they expected to pay their share of costs for the dike just as city residents would, and their assumptions were not that the normal taxation property taxes were what was going into that but this was a special assessment and that was what they were discussing and that was something they expected to pay if they were going to get a dike and would help pay for that dike. Council Member Kreun stated in response to that is that the citizens of Grand Forks are paying a 15 mill increase on their general taxes in order for us to accomplish that, that would have to be an additional special assessment because we can’t tax you, and that’s one of the reasons that they would want to annex the citizens into Grand Forks and even if one of the citizens in your group made a comment to tack that onto the special assessments, if we use that same formula don’t think can attach that to the special assessments, would have to be a voluntary payment by you, and if everyone agree to get the dike but have no guarantees plus there are hundreds of thousands of dollars that are attached to this dike project that are not assessed through the special assessment or through the mill levy that is taken up in general staff time and engineering time and all of the things that were done, everything does not come out of the dike assessment fund, and that’s one of the other reasons why annexation is an important part of the discussion and decision making process, not just the guaranteed dollars, many intrinsic dollars that are involved and that's why annexation is even more important.
Council Member Burke stated the taxes and expenses that we can’t directly allocate to the funding for the dike, that he finds it frustrating that the city council of Grand Forks is being asked to make a decision for people who aren’t in the city of Grand Forks that their own elected representatives couldn’t or wouldn’t make and doesn’t think we should be dealing with them directly, should be dealing on a government to government basis between the City and the County and if the County Commission can’t make this decision, then why are we dealing with individual neighborhoods trying to broker an agreement that the County Commission couldn’t do.
Council Member Bakken stated there was another point, that the people in East Lake are against having the City put a dike around their property.
Council Member Kreun stated one of the reasons this group has spent a very great deal of time on this is because we do value this particular group of citizens outlying our neighborhood, we understand that they are part of the community, understand that they shop here, etc. but there is a small difference, that we have no control over this particular group and that’s part of the reason why it can’t function the same, and doesn’t want anyone to minimize the amount of time that has been put into this project, amount of staff or council time, County officials’ time, etc. and that there have been three different studies on this particular area and each time they can’t come to an exact consensus because there isn’t a right or wrong answer and we have an obligation to the rest of our citizens in Grand Forks to move this process forward, important that we move this dike process forward for protection of the citizens and for cost to the citizens, also the remaking of the whole Red River Valley all the way from Wahpeton to the Canadian border, and for all these reasons that we have in order for us to become progressive and going forward, have to make a decision this evening.
Rick Abar, 6810 Lake Drive, stated that this project needs to be done, that when they state that we can’t come to a consensus, that the meetings started four years ago and the information they had was zip; the information they have now they received this year, and then had a meeting and made a decision and asked if he won’t have to pay $600 month taxes to be annexed, that he won’t have to pay hundreds of dollars a month for the dike, nothing was done in studying their area - nobody said anything until they moved the dike line close to them, the problem right now is that the council is trying to make a decision to get the dike done, they are trying to find out what their life is going to be like, where the dike is going to be - whether in their back yard or in the original area, it’s the City’s decision because is City’s project, don’t palm off on the County, the County was trying to get involved before but they couldn’t because it’s the City’s project and time to make decision, but you can’t harm a bunch of people living out there by moving the dike closer and de-valuing their property and can’t rip up their back yards, take out houses without a long term study, that no concrete information was ever given to them until this year.
Council Member Kreun stated he, Mr. Gershman and several other members attended several of those meetings and those were the questions that were asked, and were able to bring you projected costs for the dike, projected costs for special assessments if you were brought into the city, taxing authority and studies that were done by Barr, the Corps, etc. gave a good perimeter of what would happen in each case scenario, and now that this group has taken that information and digested it and majority of them came to a consensus. Mr. Abar stated that what their decision was, is that they can’t afford annexation, the specials alone on his house were between $525 and $600 when all the projects were done, and now rate up by almost 22% on value of his house but because they worked themselves to do things. Council Member Kreun stated that’s the decision that you are making at this time, that you’ve evaluated all the information now, taken costs and indicated that the cost benefit ratio isn’t there, and have come to the same conclusion that the Corps and other studies have given. Mr. Abar stated that’s why he wanted it on the record that basically they weren’t sitting back but waiting for the information and when received it, knew what they were looking at. Council Member Kreun stated that each time there was a study, studies do take a long time and cost a lot of money, each particular one could take six months, etc. and each time that study was asked for by either the council or this group or the County, you added that time frame on, and at this time have the most up to date available information that we can obtain. Mr. Abar stated that the other issue that they probably should put out there besides saying they wanted the blue line, that’s 39-40 houses; that to keep it away from them so not intrude on their neighborhood and let Shadyridge area decide on how close they want it, etc.
Council Member Martinson stated that Mr. Abar said they can’t afford annexation, however, talking about various dike lines, and if the Corps of Engineers would say they would do the blue line but it’s betterment, green line is the freebie, and is confused as they say they can’t afford annexation but how could they pay for the betterments or a blue line or yellow line. Mr. Abar stated their opinion has always been that if you had the project as a whole and included Grand Forks, and if talked to them earlier and would include this area and annex it in financially friendly way, where not putting all the specials in at them in rapid fire and given some leeway as to sidewalks, and why aren’t they the same group as the total populace of the city, because it’s all divided among them, why is it because its $3.5 million on this part of it, that it’s all theirs; and that there was a timetable they were given, talking about 2014 for annexation.
Mr. Abar asked what was wrong with their paying 15 mills and why should they pay more; that they pay a lot of taxes but it’s 33% increase in city taxes but that includes the dike, the police protection, fire protection and utility specials and they are willing to pay the 15 mills and maybe 20 mills if negotiate, but the problem is that nobody discussed these figures with them until now and brought it to them, and not at a deadline where decision has to be made; and his point is that they are going to be making their decision and should do it, but don’t intrude on them with an orange line or yellow line, but thinks the dike should stay away from them if it can’t protect them and give them a chance to protect themselves in the event of that happening and can work with the State. President Gershman stated there are some alternatives through Soil Conservation where you could build a ring dike that could be certified by the Corps, and there is something they can do.
Mr. Grasser stated there’s a couple ways you move into a project like this, and one is very analytical and the Corps does that with their cost benefit ratios, etc. and part is faith, that numbers weren’t forthcoming because the City didn’t know and the City has moved into this basically as a leap of faith, only had general perimeters from the Corps, didn’t know would get State participation, didn’t know how the dollars were going to come out, how assessed, etc. and for Grand Forks became a quality of life, health safety issue and a leap of faith and if wait for all those answers to come in, it takes time, money and doesn’t mean anyone holding back, information just isn’t there.
Council Member Kreun moved that we affirm the current Corps of Engineers recommended flood protection alignment (green line) in consideration of significant risk of negative impact on project schedule, increased costs of any alternative alignment (both construction and future operation and maintenance), lack of consensus by impacted neighborhoods as to appropriate location, difficult acquisition of right of way, and neighborhood condition of no annexation to the city. Further, staff is directed to continue investigation of other potential projects to protect land within the city limits that is currently unprotected, independent of the Corps of Engineers project. The motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson.
Council Member Burke asked for clarification on the last part of the motion with regard to protecting parts of the City independent of the Corps project, and if any particular areas in mind. Council Member Kreun stated that the portion that is in the city limits want to continue studying what can be done and how developed but wants that independent of the Corps’ dike alignment of the Corps funding.
Darrell Adams, Grand Forks Shadyridge Estates, stated he would like it to be on record that the City is making one of the largest mistakes that’s made in a hundred years by not protecting the property which is in Shadyridge, which was annexed to the city against the owners wishes, now that it has been annexed it is the most prime development land that Grand Forks has, there’s a moral obligation to protect this property or buy it out, that Grand Forks will suffer for many years to come once they run out of prime land to develop, and knows there is some talk of doing another dike to protect that area but feels that’s 5 years away before it will happen and too long off, that he has tried to cooperate in this for years and still will but feels that if it’s not bought out or protected, they’ve been put in a bad situation.
Ken Johnson, 6415 Lake Drive, that he wanted to clear up one misperception that has been discussed, that a couple comments were made about everything given to them without paying for it, basically with wanting the protection yet no annexation - that they are not asking for that, that they are willing to pay for their fair share of the dike at the same ratio as what the people in the city want, that it’s the city dike on county property, that they have maintained that the City has a legal right through the easement process to build their dike on County property but the city is being benefited by the dike and they are not, it’s being built on the county property and to some this is looked at as an intrusion on the county property but it’s not that they are begging for the protection yet don’t want to pay for it, the city is getting the protection at the expense of the county residents. He stated that a major concern of a lot of people out there is, that a lot of people are retiring or close to retirement and looking at selling their homes in 10 or 20 years, what is going to be the value of the property after the dike is built, will they be able to sell their homes, realtors have been asked by different residents, what would happen to the value of the properties, estimates given - 20%, 30% drop in value and it isn’t just the protection from the flood that people are concerned about, it’s the loss of property value - that they are losing their property values at the expense of the city protection on county property.
President Gershman stated it was his understanding that 20 properties have sold in that area and if that’s true, then all of these problems have been disclosed to the property purchaser and to the fact that there’s activity, people knowing that it could be impacted and thinks that 20 to 30% maybe wrong because the consumer is extremely smart and they would have discounted that already and evidently they didn’t. Mr. Johnson stated some were sold near assessed value but far from appraised value at a large discount, and that’s what people concerned about discount, and once the dike is built and are an unprotected area at that time what percentage of discount will see in their property.
Upon call for the question and upon roll call vote the following voted “aye”: Council Members Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Gershman - 11; voting “nay”: none. President Gershman declared the motion carried.
ADJOURN
It was moved by Council Member Burke and seconded by Council Member Martinson that we adjourn. Carried 11 votes affirmative.
Respectfully submitted,
John M. Schmisek
City Auditor
Approved:
_______________________________________
Harold Gershman, President of the City Council