Council Minutes

PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
Monday, August 5, 1996

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, August 5, 1996 at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. with Mayor Owens presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Beach, Polovitz, Ellingson, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Hagness - 13; absent: Council Member Hanson - 1.

Mayor Owens announced that anyone wishing to speak to any item may do so by being recognized prior to a vote being taken on the matter.

APPROVE MINUTES JULY 1, 1996

Typewritten copies of the minutes of the regular meeting of the city council held on Monday, July 1, 1996, were presented and read. It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Hagness that these minutes be approved as read. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3603, AMENDING THE LAND
USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND REFER AMENDED PLAN BACK TO PLANNING AND
ZONING FOR CONSIDERATION

An ordinance entitled "An ordinance relating to the Comprehensive Plan, amending Chapter XVIII, Article 8, Comprehensive Plan; Section 18-0802, Elements, of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, pertaining to the 2015 Grand Forks Land Use Plan" which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on May 6, 1996, and upon which public hearing had been scheduled for this evening, was presented and read for consideration on second reading.

The city auditor reported that the required legal notice had been published calling for a public hearing to be held on this matter this evening and further that to date no protests or grievances had been filed with his office.

The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the matter of approval of resolution adopting the 2015 Land Use Plan, and recommended final approval and passage of the ordinance amending the Land Use Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

It was moved by Council Member Hagness and seconded by Council Member Glassheim that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.

Mayor Owens called for the public hearing.

Howard Swanson, city attorney, advised council that the Planning and Zoning Commission has provided a report with an approval of the Land Use Plan, the council has before it the Plan, and council has the ability to make any modifications to the Plan that the council deems appropriate; however, if there are any modifications to the Plan, those modifications need to be referred back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their action if they choose to take any, if they do not take action within 30 days of council's report back to them, it will be deemed that the Commission has implicitly approved those changes, and would then be effective at the expiration of the 30 days.

Council Member Babinchak moved to amend the current Land Use Plan that was approved at Planning & Zoning Commission to change the property south of 17th
Avenue South and west of South 42nd Street back to residential with a small
14590
August 5, 1996

portion of that along 17th Avenue South light commercial or office commercial which had been approved during preliminary plan that they had. Council Member Sande seconded the motion.

Robert Bushfield, city planner, presented maps showing area as originally approved at preliminary approval and the way it was presented at the Century School meetings, and the way it was amended at the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion meeting which would change that piece of property from residential to commercial, and motion at P & Z didn't differentiate between B-1 (Limited Business) type use or commercial, all designated as commercial.

Council Member Babinchak stated that one of the reasons for her amendment is that all through the process they had told residents that this area would be residential and makes sense to keep as residential as an outlet to go on the west side of the interstate as residential; commercial was not felt to be needed when discussed. She also stated that it would not be single family housing on that property but multi-residential, etc.

Council Member Hagness stated that one of the reasons that property looked at as business was because zoning can always be changed by future councils and planning commissions; that for proper, orderly growth you do not put resi- dential housing next to an interstate highway because of noise, etc. but if have apartment units, those more transient people and don't have concerns that residential housing does; and consider what is best use in that area.

Council Member Sande urged support of the amendment; that based on current draft of the Land Use Plan, there are 2800 acres of residential property in Grand Forks and 1150 acres of commercial property, the increase in the projected growth in land use acreage shown in the draft would indicate that the city would have an increase by 2015 of 32% in residential and 42% in com- mercial acres, that there are quite a few commercial acres that currently are undeveloped and thinks they will be skewing the development of the city by having so many acres designated as commercial property, and urged support of the amendment.

Mr. Bushfield reviewed density of area south of 17th Avenue South and stated that he didn't support this at the Planning Commission meeting but didn't support for different reason, and why what is proposed is poor planning, that staff recommendation was to support multiple family, poor planing because do transitions in rear property lines, not across street from each other, so don't have residential uses across from commercial uses, so he felt that this corridor should be commercial on both sides for the same depth or all com- mercial with transition created in rear yards. He stated that if mix uses, doesn't work very well for either, have higher volumes of traffic on arterial street, ie., South 42nd Street, and hurts commercial on west side of South 42nd St., recommended that property remain as residential or that both sides be commercial. There was also some discussion re. buffer zone area between development and Interstate, and that by putting an adequate buffer adjacent to the Interstate can probably accommodate the multiple family uses that Mr. Hagness talked about in his amendment at the Planning & Zoning Commission and they showed a 25% buffer that was 25 ft. and that buffer carried all the way through so could end up screening with fairly dense screening of evergreens, that it would be his hope that they wouldn't end up putting in buffer wall, that when detailed development plan comes in for this area, will make sure they are aware of it, and can also adjust the site plans so the buildings set as far away from Interstate as possible, and possibly screen by the garages. He stated they have ability at the Planning and Zoning Commission to adjust site plans so can use other things for barriers to serve as sight and sound protection.

Mr. Swanson advised that the motion on the floor would amend that portion of
14591
August 5, 1996

the Plan from commercial deleting the commercial area that Mr. Bushfield pointed out, and converting that to residential and multi-densities.

Upon call for the question on the amendment and upon roll call vote, the following voted "aye": Council Member Beach, Polovitz, Ellingson, Hamerlik, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner - 11; voting "nay": Council Member Glassheim, Hagness - 2. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried and the amendment approved.

It was moved by Council Member Beach that the Plan reflect a possible future elementary school on North 55th Street between 6th and 10th Avenues North, contingent upon action to that effect by the School District on August 13; Council Member Polovitz seconded the motion.

There was discussion as to whether the plan should include location of a future elementary school on the west side of the Interstate. It was noted by Council Member Beach that the School Board has a subcommittee known as Facilities Committee, that they met last week and said that a school would not be located in that area, but that there is considerable data that says that they might; their concern is that children from that area taken to Lake Agassiz and West Schools east of I-29, and if pulled those children out, might jeopardize future of West School; thinks there will be enough children in that area for an elementary school, especially before 2015. Council Member Sande agreed, that at her insistence there is a map of Grand Forks School District No. 1 in the revised draft of the Plan, and is appropriate that School District make mention of the possibility that they might have school there somewhere.

Council Member Carpenter stated he supported intent of Council Member Beach's motion, that they talk about affordable housing and this is probably area where most affordable housing is and not willing to support it in the long range plan with an elementary school, should be doing that rather than forcing all of the residential development to the south end where more expensive to develop and build than going to the west; and moved to delete contingency from the amendment; Council Member Babinchak seconded the motion.

Council Member Hamerlik stated he didn't like amendment, that it's only if they act on August 13, and suggested deleting that date. Council Members Beach and Polovitz agreed to delete date from their motion.

Council Member Beach stated he understood it was policy in the Planning Dept. and in Planning & Zoning Commission that when project future schools, you basically reflect feelings of the School District and have not over-ruled them.

Robert Kweit, chairman of the subcommittee reported that the committee put together this plan and did not wrestle with a commercial area south of l7th Avenue, but did wrestle with where the schools should be placed; that the discussion was that they have no authority over School District, that our responsibility is to tell them where we project residential growth and other growth in the city, and that based upon our projections they will make their projections as to where they will need schools. He stated in light of issues raised, the School Board said they would reconsider locating a school west of the Interstate and apparently that's what they are doing, and would be happy to include a school where the School Board wants to put it, but we have no authority over the School Board and council has no authority over the School Board except for persuasion.

Council Member Carpenter stated the intent of his amendment was to delete any reference to the School District, that they recommend that it be put into the
plan that there be a school in the Richard's West area.
14592
August 5, 1996

Mr. Swanson stated they are dealing with the amendment to the amendment and that deletes any reference to the School Board, that if that motion carries, would then be voting on the motion that would place the projected school in the Richard's West Addition between 6th and 10th Avenues North along North 55th Street.

Upon call for the question on the amendment to the amendment and upon voice vote, the motion carried.

It was moved by Council Members Bakken and Glassheim to amend the motion to show location west of interstate and north of BNRR.

Mr. Swanson advised they are dealing with a plan, the plan will show specific locations, if you review your land use plan you will see specific locations for proposed schools, parks, proposed development, and to simply approve a concept plan, long term plan, without some location, does it provide any benefit. He also advised that this body has no authority to determine the location of a school whatsoever.

Council Members Beach and Polovitz asked to delete any reference to additions, and to say in the proximity of 55th Street and 6th Avenue North.

After further discussion Council Member Glassheim withdrew his second to the amendment; and Council Member Bakken withdrew his motion.

Upon call for the question on the amendment as amended, the motion carried 13 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the question on the original motion and second reading of the ordinance, as amended and upon roll call vote, the following voted "aye": Council Members Beach, Polovitz, Ellingson, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Hagness - 13; voting "nay": none. Mayor Owens declared the ordinance adopted.

Mr. Swanson advised that insofar as the Plan has now been amended following the report from the Planning and Zoning Commission, the matter should be referred back to the Planning & Zoning for their consideration.

Moved by Babinchak and Carpenter to refer the matter back to Planning & Zoning for their consideration. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

Mr. Bushfield and Mayor Owens thanked Dr. Kweit for the work he put into this plan.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARING AND CONTINUE MATTER OF
DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF PROTEST TO
PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF SHADYRIDGE ESTATES FIRST,
SECOND AND THIRD ADDITIONS, SHADYRIDGE ESTATES
FOURTH AND FIFTH RESUBDIVISIONS AND UNPLATTED
PORTION OF SECTIONS 26 AND 27, T151N, R50W OF
5TH PM TO AUGUST 19, 1996

The city auditor reported the proper notice had been placed in the official newspaper publishing the resolution of annexation passed on May 6, 1996 and that the City has provided the required mailed notice to the individual property owners relative to the annexation of all of Shadyridge Estates First Addition, all of Shadyridge Estates Second Addition, all of Shadyridge Estates Third Addition, all of Shadyridge Estates Fourth Resubdivision, all of Shady- ridge Estates Fifth Resubdivision, and an unplatted portion of Sections 26 and 27, T151N, R50W of the 5th PM, and that the notice called for a hearing this evening for the purpose of hearing and determination of the sufficiency of any 14593 August 5, 1996

protests to the proposed annexation.

The city auditor reported that his office has received petitions from property owners of Lot 4, Lot 5, Lot 6, Lot 7, Lot 8, Lot 9, Lot 10, Lot 11, Lot 12, Lot 13 which is now Lot B, Lot 14 which is now Lot A, Lot 15, Block 1, Shadyridge Estates 1st Addition, which constitutes 32.24% of the total acreage of the territory proposed to be annexed and the protest represents more than 25% of the territory and that is a sufficient protest at this time.

Mr. Swanson, city attorney, advised that since there is more than 25% protest the proper motion would then be to determine a sufficiency of protest, and then council has decision to make: 1) either terminate the proceedings on annexation as it has been brought before them, or 2) petition the attorney general's office to convene an annexation review commission. He stated that the matter before the council is to determine a sufficiency of protest and based upon those protests there is a sufficiency of protest.

Mayor Owens called for the public hearing.

Pat Morley, attorney representing the developers, Lavonne and Darrell Adams, stated that when this area first developed Shadyridge One was the first area of development and originally was planned to be three-acre sites, but due to the flood plain and the agricultural zoning the lots are five-acre sites, that many of the lots are sold and planned to be annexed January 1, 2014. He stated that Mrs. Adams petitioned to annex 53 acres of land, that once the process started it was out of Mrs. Adams' control and this is what we have left, approx. 200 acres. He stated that it is the position of the Adams' that they cannot economically develop this property if annexed in one group, not including the area that is to be annexed January 1, 2014. He stated that many of the people who have purchased lots in Shadyridge I, would like to see this area annexed no sooner that 2014. He stated that it is the request of the Adams' that the City terminate the annexation proceedings and also that the property remaining to be annexed January 1, 2014 and that there would be no protests at that time. He stated that the area is unworkable, too large and cannot be absorbed economically by the City or by the developer, and would in effect put the developer out of business of developing this area. He also stated that there have been some other changes, Sisters of St. Francis property has been sold and is in the process of being developed, that at a later date Mrs. Adams and Darrell Adams will be coming back for additional annexation in smaller parts (in 10-20 acres parcels). He stated that in behalf of the developers, his request is that the annexation proceedings be terminated and sent back to the particular body that would need to look at this again. He stated that there are some property owners in Shadyridge I that have strong feelings about not coming into the city until 2014, they were told that when the bought these lots that they would not be annexed for 20-25 years; that has been changed to 2014 and he understands that is a satisfactory compromise; that they are concerned that if this goes back for review that they may be annexed sooner than that. He stated that is the position of the developer and of the owners, but that he doesn't represent any of the owners, because it is not economical basis, would be subject to special assessments.

Mr. Swanson stated that if proceedings terminated that the plats tentatively approved in any of the concept or detailed development plans are no longer valid, excluding Shadyridge I. Mr. Adams stated that was satisfactory.

John Hill, 1720 Belmont Road, property owner in Shadyridge First Addition, asked if the property owners in Shadyridge First Addition would withdraw their protest, will the year 2014 stand as the earliest possible annexation date. Mr. Swanson stated that without knowing calculations of what portion
Shadyridge First comprises of the total annexation area, can't answer that; if the area is still in excess of 25% having protests, wouldn't matter. Mr. Hill 14594
August 5, 1996

stated that those property owners would like to go on record that if Shady- ridge First has enough acreage to make protest less than 25%, would like to withdraw their protest to keep year 2014 as earliest possible date of annexation. Mr. Hill reported he has signed petitions from residents withdrawing their protest and presented signed withdrawals.

There was some discussion that if annexation proceedings terminated, who could start proceedings for annexation in the future; Mr. Swanson stated that council can move forward with annexation proceedings without consent of the property owner, and go through same procedures.

Ross Haugen, owner of Lot No. 9 in Shadyridge First Addition, asked questions re. annexation procedures.

David Wilson, owner of Lot 10 in Shadyridge First Addition, stated that it was very disappointing for the property owners to have to continue to come back before council, that the issue is that Mr. Adams wants to develop one small piece of property that is becoming adjacent to the city and the other property owners want to be in the country, where they were verbally promised by Mr. Bushfield and Mr. Adams, and questioned whether council would stand by what these people verbally promised, and would like to see this issue addressed and finalized.

Mr. Morley stated that this started with simple request from Lavonne Adams to annex Shadyridge Third, the parcel closest to Belmont Road, that there must be some way that residents can be assured that they won't be annexed until 2014; that there never was any intent to annex all of this property at the same time, and because of that have the controversy, and it is Mr. Adams request that the City terminate the proceedings. He stated that the property owners don't need the City right now, have Traill County Water, Nodak Electric, telephone service and not a burden on the City; that at some time they should be brought into the city, but with the same orderly development that other areas brought in; that he can't think of a time when the City annexed 200 acres at one time, that the cost of providing services, lift station, etc. and his request again on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Adams to terminate the annexation proceedings and assure the property owners that they will be brought into the city no sooner than 2014.

Lavonne Adams stated that they paid $390,000 for their road and that city people use their road every day, and they have to take Belmont Road to town and they do support the city of Grand Forks, and that people outside the city have no rights, that they met with Mr. Bushfield and were told that property would not be brought into the city for 20 years; and questioned how all that property could be annexed at one time.

Mr. Bushfield reported that he met with Dr. Wilson and also with the Adams' re. this property and worked with them closely on the development of the property, that when he was asked whether Shadyridge First Addition was going to come in, it was without the knowledge that the Sisters property was going to be annexed, and without the knowledge that Mr. and Mrs. Adams were going to ask for the development of Shadyridge Second, Third, Fourth and Fifth Additions; that had he known some of those answers, he probably would have responded differently when Dr. Wilson called him. He stated that when they are asked by the public what their best guess is here, they have to give it to them and try to be as honest as he can with the information available to them at the time. He stated that in his estimation the best interest of the community is to annex that property, and would like to remind everyone that these property owners had covenants attached to their property wherein they agreed not to protest annexation; that when property developed and when it
becomes contiguous their recommendation as staff is going to be consistent with policies adopted by the council, and that is to annex it.
14595
August 5, 1996

Mr. Morley stated that Mrs. Adams petitioned for annexation of Shadyridge Estates Third Addition only.

Mr. Swanson stated for the record there have been turned in withdrawals of protest by Terry Amble, Lot 11, Shadyridge Estates First; Ross Haugen, Lot 9, Shadyridge Estates First; Dale Romuld, Lot 6, Shadyridge First; Mr. and Mrs. Jon Raymond, Lot 7, Shadyridge First; Mr. and Mrs. Steven Bollinger, Lot 8; Mr. and Mrs. David Wilson, Lot 10; Mr. Hill, Lot 4; Mr. Ahmed, Lot 13; that appears to reduce the protest from 66.4 acres down to 20 acres, there is some issue with regard to Grand Forks Traill Water as to what standing they have or what property interests they have and whether or not that area is calculated twice with other protests. He stated he will not make a determination tonight nor does he think this body should rely on staff to make a decision tonight on whether or not that meets 25% protest, and his recommendation to this body is that given the withdrawal of protests that are now made of record, that they close the public hearing with regard to protest issues and continue the matter for two weeks for determination of sufficiency of protest.

Dr. Wilson stated to clarify Mr. Bushfield's comments, that he didn't come to Grand Forks until a little over year ago, and didn't buy the property until approx. January 1995.

Dr. Abdel Ahmed, owner of Lot 13, Shadyridge I, stated that it is not that the people who live in that particular area don't want to get into the city, was told at the time he purchased the lot that property could not be in the city and that would not happen for 20 years and subsequently lots divided differently with a higher price, that they would look at it as honor that they be given some time to recoup their expense, and why annex now when everything has been done, rather than two years ago.

Scott Stradlie, RR 1, Grand Forks Township, stated he was speaking in behalf of John Drees and himself, both members of the Grand Forks Township Board of Supervisors, that the city of Grand Forks is largely developed from Grand Forks Township, that it began at DeMers and runs to the RR track to the west and to the south to County road known as the Merrifield Road; that about 30% of this township remains, other 70% having been annexed by the City; that the annexation process is creating a financial problem for them, that they have 16 miles of rural roads to maintain, that they do get some money from gasoline tax but rely on property taxes. He stated that one of the roads the annexation is adjacent to is a township road (mis-identified as County road on the maps) that runs about 1/8th mile east of Belmont to the Coulee; that the annexation creating more traffic for the township road and at the same time taking away property tax base from them. He stated that he is here to address the whole issue of orderly development, that this annexation violates the principle of orderly development because orderly development has to consider the financial viability of other governmental units impacted by these actions, and that this particular annexation as proposed would affect them financially and would encourage council to vote entire annexation down and send back to square zero and in the process would hope there was opportunity for the Township to have more say/participation in the hearing process in order to try to get more Township input into the notion of what orderly development is.

Mike Juntunen, attorney representing Grand Forks Traill Water, stated they have furnished water utility services to this area and have an investment that is protected by federal law and the annexation presents a conflict, whether it goes forward now or later. He stated there have been other conflicts in utility services and there will continue to be conflicts as the city grows
into competing areas of other utility providers. He stated protests filed on their behalf, that they have not been announced publicly before, but wishes
to make it a matter of public record that if the City annexes, they are competing with another utility provider and that there is a federal statute
14596
August 5, 1996

which grants them priority, and you cannot displace, in his opinion, their particular rights to provide water to these services.

Mr. Swanson stated that Grand Forks Traill Water owns an easement in the property that has been identified on their protest and asked who holds fee title. Mr. Juntenan stated fee title to whomever the land owners were at the time they were granted by Lavonne Adams.

Council Member Carpenter stated there is 230 acres in the annexation, have protests for 66 acres, and asked what status of the balance of that property. Mr. Morley stated the remainder of the property is owned by Ralph Adams and Lavonne Adams, but understood they had protested.

Mayor Owens closed the public hearing.

It was moved by Council Member Glassheim and seconded by Council Member Carpenter that the determination of sufficiency of protest be continued to August 19, 1996. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE APPLICATION FOR MOVING PERMIT TO MOVE
BUILDING TO 1406 10TH AVENUE FOLLOWING PUBLIC
HEARING

The city auditor reported that the notice of public hearing on the application by Troy A. Schill to move building from 920 South 19th Street to 1406 10th Avenue South to be used as a garage had been published and posted as required.

Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter. There were none.

Committee No. 3, Public Service, reported having considered the application for permit to move garage from 920 South 19th Street to 1406 10th Avenue South, and recommended to approve application, subject to the public hearing.

It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Klave that this recommendation be and is hereby approved and further that Mr. Schill be authorized to move the building. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

COUNCIL MEMBER BEYER EXCUSED

ADOPT RESOLUTION VACATING PORTION OF BIKEWAY
AND PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY EASEMENT IN BLOCKS 1
AND 2, GARDEN VIEW ESTATES FIRST ADDITION

The city auditor reported that pursuant to instructions by the city council after having received a petition to vacate the 20-foot wide easterly and westerly bikeway and pedestrian walkway easement lying 10 feet on either side of the lot line common to Blocks 1 and 2, Garden View Estates First Addition, the required legal notice had been published calling for a public hearing to be held this evening and further that no protests or grievances had been filed with his office.

Mayor Owens called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on the matter. There were none.

It was moved by Council Member Hagness and seconded by Council Member Polovitz that we do hereby find and determine an insufficiency of protest on the
request for vacation. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Council Member Hagness introduced the following resolution which was presented and read: Document No. 7132 - Resolution.
14597
August 5, 1996

It was moved by Council Member Klave and seconded by Council Member Sande that this resolution be and is hereby adopted. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

RECESS FOR 5-MINUTES; RECONVENE

Mayor Owens called for a 5-minute recess; the council reconvened at 9:25 p.m. with all members present except Council Member Hamerlik.

REPORTS OF OFFICERS

The city auditor's report on investment activities for period ending July 31, 1996 was presented and read. It was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Ellingson that this report be received and filed. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

COUNCIL MEMBER HAMERLIK REPORTED BACK

REPORT OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS

A communication from Bev Collings, secretary, Board of Zoning Adjustments, was presented and read stating that the Board had held a public hearing in City Hall on July 18, 1996, that notice had been published as required and that the following appeals were heard: 1) Bob Klave on behalf of Albertus and Caroline Kresel, 322 North 5th Street, request for variance to the accessory building requirements to erect a garage, with variance approved allowing a five ft. setback to the overhead door of a garage to construct an accessory building; 2) John O'Keefe on behalf of James Senske, 2697 and 2649 North 44th Street, request for variance to the paving and landscaping requirements for parking lots to erect a building and pave at a future date, with variance approved allowing the paving and curbing requirements of the parking lot to be delayed for five years and paving and curbing to be completed by the end of the fifth year; 3) Radke Construction on behalf of James Ness and Debra Hartje, 307 7th Avenue North, request for variance to the front yard setback requirements to erect an addition onto the dwelling, with this item being held as no one appeared to speak to the matter.

It was moved by Council Member Sande and seconded by Council Member Polovitz that this report be and is hereby received and filed. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE BILLS

Vendor Payment Listing No. 96-13, dated August 5, 1996, and totaling $669,067.83, all having been audited by the city auditor for payment in accordance with Regulation No. 2, was presented and read.

It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Beyer that these bills be allowed and that the city auditor be authorized to issue warrants in payment of the same. Upon roll call the following voted "aye": Council Members Beach, Polovitz, Ellingson, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Hagness - 13; voting "nay": none. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried and the bills ordered paid.

ADOPT RESOLUTION RELATING TO $4,530,000
REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1996B,
AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC SALE THEREOF

Committee No. 1, Finance, reported having considered the matter of sale of refunding bonds, and recommended that we adopt the resolution authorizing issuance of $4,530,000 Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series 1996B, and offer for sale, with sale date set for September 16, 1996.
14598
August 5, 1996

It was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Carpenter that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

Council Member Babinchak introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Council Member Carpenter: Document No. 7133 - Resolution.

Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Council Members Beach, Polovitz, Ellingson, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Hagness - 13; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.

REJECT COPIER BIDS, AND AUTHORIZE REBID

Committee No. 1, Finance, reported having considered the matter of copier bids, and recommended to reject the bids and authorize the finance department to rebid.

It was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Carpenter that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

AUTHORIZE HEALTH BENEFITS FOR GRANT-FUNDED
POSITIONS

Committee No. 1, Finance, reported having considered the matter of health benefits for grant-funded positions, and recommended that the request be denied.

It was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Carpenter that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.

After some discussion and upon call for the question and upon roll call vote, the following voted "aye": Council Members Hamerlik, Babinchak - 2; voting "nay": Council Members Polovitz, Ellingson, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Bakken, Hafner, Hagness, Beach - 11. Mayor Owens declared the motion defeated.

It was then moved by Council Member Carpenter and seconded by Council Member Ellingson that we allow health benefits for grant-funded positions.

John O'Leary, executive director Urban Development, asked that they be allowed to make administrative decision on percentage basis.

Upon call for the question and upon voice vote the motion carried 12 to 1, Council Member Babinchak voted against the motion.

APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT

A request to amend the Assessing Department budget to reflect transfer from cash carryover in the amount of $1,532.00 to authorize re-arrangement of work stations, was presented and read. it was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Carpenter that this amendment be approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE REQUEST FROM SKI AND BIKE SHOP TO
BLOCK PORTION OF RIVERBOAT ROAD FOR GT AIRSHOW
ON AUGUST 9

14599
August 5, 1996

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request from the Ski & Bike shop to block Riverboat Road from just east of Bremers Driveup facilities to DeMers Avenue on Friday, August 9, from 3:00 to 9:00 p.m. for event featuring GT Air Show (traveling bicycle stunt team), and recommended to approve the request.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE REQUEST FROM AMERICAN DIABETES
ASSN. TO HOLD ANNUAL FALL RIDE & STRIDE
ON SEPTEMBER 8

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request from American Diabetes Assn. to use city bikepath to hold its annual Fall Ride & Stride fund raising event on September 8, and recommended to approve the request.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

AUTHORIZE INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS AT 26TH
AVENUE SOUTH AND SOUTH 26TH STREET

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request to convert yield signs to stop signs at 26th Avenue South and South 26th Street, and recommended to approve the request and authorize installation of the stop signs.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 voted affirmative.

AUTHORIZE INSTALLATION OF YIELD SIGNS ON
SOUTH 15TH STREET AND ON 7TH AVENUE SOUTH

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request for intersection control along South 15th Street between 13th Avenue South and DeMers Avenue, and recommended to authorize installation of yield signs on South 15th Street at 11th Avenue South and on 7th Avenue South at South 15th Street.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

AUTHORIZE SPEED LIMIT SIGNS IN ALLEY BEHIND
LUCKY INN AT 1130 HAMMERLING AVENUE

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request for closing alley behind Lucky Inn at 1130 Hammerling Avenue, and recommended to receive and file, and to direct that speed limit signs be placed in the alley.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes
affirmative.

AUTHORIZE REMOVAL OF PARKING AT INTERSECTION
OF LETNES AND SOUTH 12TH STREET
14600
August 5, 1996

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request for "no parking here to corner" signs at Letnes and South 12th Street, and recommended to authorize removal of parking 50 ft. in either direction at this inter- section.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE REQUEST FOR NO PARKING AND STRIPING
ON CURVE AT 49TH AVENUE SOUTH AND CHESTNUT
STREET

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request for "no parking" signs and yellow stripe on curve at 49th Avenue South and Chestnut Street, and recommended to approve the request.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

AUTHORIZE INSTALLATION OF YIELD SIGNS ON 4TH
AVENUE NORTH AT NORTH 6TH STREET

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the request for intersection control at 4th Avenue North and North 6th Street, and recommended to authorize installation of yield signs on 4th Avenue North at North 6th Street.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE GRANT AGREEMENTS WITH ND DEPARTMENT
OF HEALTH

Committee No. 2, Public Safety, reported having considered the matter of grant applications for health department: a) Community Health Immunization Info. Network Access and License Agreement; b) Care Coordinating Service for Children with Special Needs; and c) Amendment to Tuberculosis Control grant agreement; and recommended to approve the grant agreements, contingent upon review and approval by the city attorney.

It was moved by Council Member Ellingson and seconded by Council Member Sande that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENTS