Council Minutes

PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
Tuesday, March 31, 1998

The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in special session in the council chambers in the City Hall on Tuesday, March 31, 1998 at 12:00 noon with Mayor Owens presiding, pursuant to call by Mayor Owens, which was served on all members of the council on March 30, 1998: Document No. 7466 - Notice.

Present at roll call were Council Members Beach, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Sande, Klave, Beyer, Babinchak, Hafner, Hagness - 13; absent: Council Member Bakken - 1.

CONSIDER FUNDING ALTERNATIVE FOR PERMANENT
FLOOD PROTECTION, AND ALLOCATE $30 MILLION
IN CDBG SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS FOR FLOOD CONTROL
PROJECT

The city auditor reported that the recommended funding for the levee that he had presented to the council over week ago, that there were various alternatives, but the key element of this is to use $30 Million of CDBG funding and a $25 Million bond issue which would be funded in two sources, one half of a new one-quarter percent sales tax which is about $700,000 a year and assess $1 Million back against different properties in the community, and with that, under half of a new one-quarter percent sales tax are estimating that an average household of 2.5 people would pay about $20 per year and the assessed portion of that based on an equal amount per parcel and also half of the debt service on a sq. footage basis would amount to $53 per year, or a grand total of $73 per year. He stated that the key question is whether they wish to pursue the one-quarter percent sales tax and if wish to have it on the ballot, then would need to decide whether on the June 9 ballot or hold and put on the November ballot. He reported that Mr. Swanson, city attorney, prepared resolution, notice and proposal to amend the Home Rule Charter, and a ballot, and if placed on the June 9 ballot, latest publication date would be April 9.

Council Member Hamerlik reported that today on their desks is a resolution, that this concerns him to have the material early enough to find out what this is about, and further that they don't even know what funds they need, have good ideas, but also concerned about where other monies may be coming from, and that while need to make some decisions soon, he's concerned that this is too short, too early after two weeks of having the proposal which Mr. Schmisek gave and which was well received, he is concerned about vote on a resolution in obtaining the necessary information to get on the June ballot.

Mayor Owens reported that meeting held today because if council wished this item to be placed on the June ballot, would have to be published April 9, but if do not wish on the June ballot, recommended considering this more thoroughly and have time to bring back.

The city auditor reported that at the informational meeting they did state that there would have to be a meeting called within the week's timeline to look at resolutions and ballot language because of the publication date, that he understands that they don't know the dollar amount and won't know in September or November and not for quite a period of time. He stated that one of the issues they need to address is whether they will go with this type of funding source, and if wish to do early enough, can accumulate some funds to help buy down any bond that have to sell.
Council Member Sande reported that two of the purposes of this bond issue and tax is repair and maintenance of flood control projects, and asked if only for over the x number of years that this bond would be available, and how do the repair and maintenance on this construction after the bond runs out. The city auditor reported that this dike or levee system does extend considerably south of town and as annex those areas some type of fee would come into the community and go into a maintenance fund for this and would be an appropriate use since the residents are now paying for this project.

Council Member Beach questioned whether statutory limit on sales tax in North Dakota, for City's share, would be two percent. The city auditor reported that there is no statutory limit for City share. Council Member Beach also questioned when Aurora issue passed the ballot, there was a quarter of a percent segment for operations of the facility, and if this passed this year, this additional quarter percent would be above and beyond what the restaurants, motels, taverns are levying and wouldn't conflict; the city auditor reported that was correct.

Council Member Hafner stated this seems premature and should hold for awhile and let people consider, have fall election.

Council Member Hagness stated that they need to indicate to general public what intentions are and how we intend to pay for any levee system and any levee system is going to take a lot of years to pay for as indicated here by the city auditor, and the indications he's getting from the general public is that the quarter percent sales tax is least painful way to do this, and special assessment method isn't acceptable to most people, that they are being taxed as much as they can handle now and that everyone pay equally, and that people coming into the community will also be paying the quarter percent sales tax. He stated that he would like to indicate to the general public that's the intention and as look at flood insurance, that if do nothing, that's not an option, going to have high cost of the levee and his indication is that the quarter percent sales tax is acceptable way to go, that he hears from people he's representing now and would encourage council to go with the quarter percent sales tax.

Council Member Klave stated he agrees with the quarter percent sales tax, but that he has had several individuals question him re. a $2,000/year assessment against their property, and concern that they don't know what numbers are and the understanding that if do nothing, $73.00 year compared to flood insurance, and trying to do in their best interest.

Council Member Glassheim agreed and gear for November ballot, but perhaps allocate or appropriate or indicate they want to set aside $30 Million from the CDBG towards paying for it so people know we are clear in taking large chunk out of local share to be moved from supplemental funds. He stated that on the quarter percent wanted to caution that if citizens of Grand Forks are not going to take some hit for protection of their own property on the property tax, doesn't think that will sell very well in other places where asking for help, federal, state and other levels, and wouldn't be for paying entirely from sales tax even though it's easier for our own citizens, we had giant flood and billions of dollars at stake, and although special assessments need to indicate that we are going to take some hurt to protect our property as well as other people.

Mayor Owens reported that she is asked continuously why they don't take the total amount out of their CDBG block grant monies, and when in Washington, D.C. and visited with Dr. Surske, head of public works Corps of Engineers, that will be dealing with putting in allocation for Water Resource Development Act for $100 Million and had senators and congressmen and staff, asked question, and asked what City could use of CDBG monies for flood protection, can use for acquisition, homes and buildings but cannot use for actual construction of the dike, and doesn't think people understand that and wants to get across. She stated that there are a lot of cities across the United States that are vying for that funding in the Water Resource Development Act, and can't depend on getting that money if rely solely on federal and state funding, and would have much better chance if show good faith by taking something out of our own pockets.

Council Member Hagness stated that they've heard from the Legislature at every meeting until we make decision on how much going to need from the State Legislature and don't know if State Legislators who have been talking to us but citizens have given enough and federal congressional people have been more than gracious to the citizens of Grand Forks and sympathetic, understanding and every time went there never had one of them question what we were doing to the extent that our State Legislators are and would think that starting in home in North Dakota it would be much more understanding than the federal legislators and congressional people are, and not finding that at all, and hoping that if she could go there and give understanding that she's received from the federal people and others explained what we went through here, that everybody suffered, and would think that the State legislators would be much more responsive all across the State, but in Grand Forks we suffered like no others suffered and wish legislators would let it die and let us explain our cause and hopefully they can be as understanding as the Governor is to help the citizens of Grand Forks. Mayor Owens reported that she did receive a letter re-stipulating that the Governor will support our half.

The city auditor reported that the council does not have to vote to put the quarter percent on the June ballot, that was an opportunity for council, and appreciates Council Member Glassheim's comments re. the $30 Million, and to remind council have put in place the voluntary acquisition program for those homes that are within the dike line and do need a funding source to pay for those. He stated that they will need to seriously consider what they will do for the November ballot and not delay, if going with the sales tax, past that point, and as move towards this project, the City is responsible initially for all purchases of land, easements and rights of way and out of that project, $120 Million is for purchases of land, easements and rights of ways and those expenditures will be funded first until they reach the 50% level.

Council Member Carpenter stated that it's going to be an issue that they need sales tax and need special assessments to accomplish what they are doing, but by taking the multitude of sources they are limiting impact to any one group of people so spreading around. He stated this is an important decision and one can't take lightly so shouldn't put on June ballot but encourage more discussion to occur about the sales tax and special assessments and how that relates to the savings for flood insurance, and get that information out and have more of a public debate on that part of this proposal.

It was moved by Council Member Glassheim that we allocate $30 Million from supplemental funding to acquisition rights of way towards flood control project. Council Member Carpenter seconded the motion. Upon voice vote, the motion carried 14 votes affirmative.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Hagness that we adjourn. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek, City Auditor

Approved:
________________________________________
Patricia A. Owens, Mayor