City of Grand Forks - Print Friendly Form

Council Minutes

PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
May 6, 2002

The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in the council chambers in City Hall on Monday, May 6, 2002 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, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave (teleconference system), Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; absent: Council Members Lunak - 1

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 that the meeting is being televised.

Mayor Brown proclaimed May 6, 2002 as Laverne Gryte Day and read the proclamation, stating her personal history and that she continues to battle cancer, secure in her faith and at peace with her God and her life; that her wishes are to be someone that makes a difference, and that she is one who makes a difference. Council Members Brooks and Gershman also commented that those who have met her have been impacted by her and her love for the city of Grand Forks; and wish her the best.

Mayor Brown reported on the matter regarding Springfest, and thanked the governmental agencies that worked together to keep the peace, including fire, police, Sheriff's Department, UND Police, Highway Patrol, ambulance and the Park District. He complimented the restraint demonstrated by the neighbors in the neighborhood that surrounds University Park. He also stated he was deeply concerned about the arrest and property damage this weekend, embarrassed by some of the actions and disappointed that some of the people have demonstrated such a lack of respect for the community. He reported that at his direction city officials have begun meeting with the Park District and other agencies during recent months and the city attorney's office to draft new language for the ordinances that will address situations like these. The drafts are at the Park District and will be following up on them with new legislation coming to the city council in the near future.

Mayor Brown congratulated the Circle of Friends Humane Society fund raiser at the Humane Society this past Sunday and those who helped raise $1,000; that Spring Clean-up is underway, started with electronics recycling at Best Buy with collections of over 5400 lbs, (2.7 tons) of electronics to be recycled, that this was organized by the ND Solid Waste Assn. and did similar projects in Fargo and Bismarck, and next week hope to put more local organizations to work.

Mayor Brown congratulated Starlites Theatre for their grand opening on Friday night, there were about 100 people there to enjoy the food, the show and the facility, and good job to Dan Eggen and to his crew and to Larry Stammen and the Grand Cities Mall, that partnership is a great fit and wishes them the best of luck. He stated he would like to thank the people who participated in the Mayor's Prayer Breakfast this morning; and that the Prime Steel Car Club adopted a park in Johnson's Addition last year with a sizeable donation of $10,000 and that they hope to donate annually to make improvements to the park that is now named Prime Steel Park (east of the Alerus), plans are to construct a shelter to be followed by the addition of restrooms and the Club is developing a schematic for overall landscaping and additional equipment.

Council Member Bjerke made several comments re. Springfest, that a year ago several council members asked the council and the Park District to take the appropriate actions, there was a fire out there last year, bottles thrown at people, etc., that the City and the Park District owe an apology to the police department and fire department who took the bottles and owe an apology to the citizens in that area for not dealing with this correctly; that he has a document from the police department where they are listing recommendations that the Park District and the city council needs to take and we didn't do anything for a year, and would certainly hope we have a plan for next year and to take the appropriate legislation; doesn't believe lawlessness and looking the other way is acceptable behavior for the government, enforce the rules no matter who violates them.

Council Member Hamerlik stated we were all disappointed in what transpired, that plaudits should go out to Lt. Nelson, Steve Mulally who did much to organize and helped out when it came to crunch time; that he would hope that the mayor, the president of the University and Mr. Staley of the Park District would be meeting as it is important to get this started, that the ordinance has been in the process and this would be start to assign certain responsibilities so that this does get done; that people are concerned and that this does not look well for the University as they try to increase enrollment. Mr. Swanson stated that the Park District itself has the full authority to adopt ordinances and that authority excludes some of the authority that the City has within Park jurisdiction, and that any actions that occur need to be a joint collaborative effort between the City and the Park District. Mayor Brown stated they would have a tentative first meeting on Wednesday with UND and Park District and report back at the next committee of the whole.

MONTHLY FLOOD PROTECTION UPDATE

Al Grasser, city engineer, stated that the written report had been submitted to the council members, that they don't have any additional information on federal appropriations, that they do continue to make progress on the plans and specs. for Phase II and proceeding on to Phases III and IV of the levee project; and presented a video showing some of the progress and construction activities that are going on.

Council Member Kerian stated there had been some discussion relating to savings in Phases II and III; Mr. Grasser stated the savings they are looking at now on upcoming phases are primarily along the lines of landscaping, not significant issues, but looking at ability for something either to be added on at the end, because most of the betterments and enhancements were really loaded up in Phase I.

Council Member Christensen asked what part of the dike will be built this summer as part of Phase I; Mr. Grasser stated there are the three reaches - one is downtown and approx. 600 to 800 ft. of dike and wall as some of that is the closure of DeMers; second reach will be through the Lincoln neighborhood area, another 800 ft. and third area in the Elmwood area, at about 800 to 1,000 ft. range; that Phase I is broken into three segments and part of what we advance funded for was to keep that contractor on track to get that accomplished. Mr. Grasser stated the current schedule for Phase II is try to open bids in June, 2002 but there is only about $1 million tentatively allocated for that work in fiscal year 2002, gets shop drawings, etc. and actually the underground is what is done first and money goes into pipes and pump stations before you build a levee, and that most likely will happen in 2003, and extent of that will depend upon property acquisition and appropriations - that to really get started on Phase II next year we need to get the President's budget up substantially higher than it is now; that the property acquisition is holding things back now but if we can get two or three reaches done and Corps will go ahead and bid it based on those reaches being available. Council Member Christensen stated to start on Phase II what do they need in the President's budget and it was his understanding we have $30 million. Mr. Grasser stated we will do work on Phase II with $30 million, our Phase II is a $23 or $28 million project, but there is also an East Grand Forks Phase III plus there is continuing work on the drainway and the President's budget has to somehow feed all of those contracts, that there is competition from 4 or 5 open contracts and the Corps will have to determine priorities and schedules and that will get tighter as the dollars are smaller, and with President's budget we might be in the neighborhood of probably only allocating $5 to $10 million worth

of work on Phase II and would be the spring and summer of 2003, but if President can get his budget up to the $50-60 million range we can start doubling those numbers and take bigger numbers out of that contract.

Melanie Parvey-Biby reviewed various greenway committee meetings:
1) Greenway Technical Committee, group of residents of Grand Forks and East Grand Forks, MN DNR and the Park District, will meet May 14 at the Park District, and one of their projects is putting together a series of maps that show the development of the greenway on both sides of the river showing trails, pedestrian access, highway recreation areas and future boat ramps and shore bank fishing.
2) Task force to discuss the greenway becoming a State Park met in April and discussed the current agreement we have with our existing local Park District and the areas they plan to manage and maintain, and discussed procedure as to how we wanted to involve the State but didn't come to any conclusions but will continue to meet and discuss. They have talked about the ND State Parks and Rec. Department currently working on a 5-year recreation plan, holding a series of public meetings throughout the state to gather input as to what the State's recreational needs are; that she will attend the meeting for our region in Grafton May 14; that they manage the land and water conservation funds and if we are interested in pursuing any funds would be important to get input as to what our recreation needs are for Grand Forks, there is a 50% local match required for that grant.
3) the DLG is working with the local architecture and engineering firm on pursuing enhancements for the Sorlie Bridge and these would be anything that would make the bridge more pedestrian friendly or enhance the value of the historic structure and working on proposal that will give estimates for these improvements and hoping to bring that to council in the near future as try to determine a funding source for that project.
4) Friends of the Greenway is planning to host a birding class the beginning of June, and GOALS and the Grand Forks Park District will be holding another Bike Day event and hope this is something that can continue to grow in the community and then move to trail systems in the near future.

PRESENTATION OF TRANSPORTATION SECURITY
ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS

Chief Packett of the police department stated that since November of last year with the forming of the TSA (Transportation Security Administration) by President Bush, the Airport Authority and local agencies have been negotiating and putting together some plans under guidelines that TSA has given to them. In February they entered into formal negotiations with the Airport Authority to look at what type of coverage the airport would need, man-hours, logistical needs without getting into too many security breaches or security issues of the airport publicly, that those negotiations have gone quite well, that they were close to a formal MOU that would come to the city attorney and the council by the State, that around April 15 the TSA informed the Airport Authority that it would be their responsibility to negotiate the MOU directly with the City rather than the TSA, and that the Airport Authority and the City have negotiated these issues locally, that they are close to an agreement that will come before council in the near future to take over operations on May 10 and some timelines they are looking at in the future is that by the end of this month some other entities will gradually be phased out, envision about a 22 month period that the police department would be involved in security out there, until such time as the TSA would have their own people hired and take over operations in Grand Forks. He reviewed the hours that they anticipate that people will be out there, costs range on the low side of about $149,000/year and if utilize primarily on duty personnel reimbursed by the TSA up to about $171,880/year, worst case scenario using a lot of overtime personnel. He stated he has been informed that 3 of the other major airports in the State have decided to hire additional personnel for the time being to perform this function, that they analyzed that and believe they can handle it with existing personnel, overtime and possibly utilization of some of their reserves and do not anticipate additional hires at this time for this function.

Council Member Bjerke asked about hiring two officers under a grant program for 22 months so that they wouldn't become permanent employees and if that wouldn't be less expensive than their proposal. Chief Packett stated they looked at the possibility of adding personnel but felt due to the uncertainty of the timeline and if had a firm commitment from the TSA, it would be a bona fide 22 months before their people would actually be on the job, then would be a real consideration but think that would be premature at this point to come to council and ask for additional people without knowing a firm timeline; and their recommendation is to handle it with existing personnel, overtime situations and possibly reserves.

Council Member Kreun asked if there were any other agencies involved, Sheriff's Department, Highway Patrol, etc. Chief Packett stated that the Highway Patrol because of statutory guidelines aren't allowed to enter into such function, and the Sheriff's Office would be the only outlet in that regard and are prepared to sit down with them and offer them some opportunities here if it becomes too taxing. Chief Packett stated it is his understanding that the City will be reimbursed.

Steve Johnson, 2787 Airport Drive, stated the reason that the burden was shifted to the Airport Authority rather than the City's negotiating directly with the TSA because there are provisions that say they will reimburse to their ability and put the burden on the airport, and they will make the City good regardless of what they get in reimbursements from the TSA. He stated the question was asked about the Sheriff's Department, that he contacted them and that they didn't rule it out, they indicated they prefer that the police department handle it if they are able, and reminded that the airport was within the city limits. It was noted this is a regional airport.

Chief Packett stated they have been in the process of negotiating with the Post Board in Bismarck re. upgrading the current license of the reserves to a part-time status which would allow them to be paid for the hours worked, they have been transitioning towards that for a number of months, and the training they give them is compatible with the State Post Board and have taken the approach that they should be fully trained the same as our regular officers are so they would be able to perform that function.

Mr. Johnson stated that they are guaranteeing that the City will be reimbursed for their costs, and are confident that the federal government will come forth and reimburse them but they are assuming the risk, and will pay the City when it is billed.

ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3923, RELATING TO SNOWMOBILE
ROUTES, RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS

An ordinance entitled "An ordinance amending Section 8-1203 of the Grand Forks City Code relating to snowmobile routes, restrictions and regulations", which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on April 15, 2002, was presented and read for consideration on second reading.

Mayor Brown opened the public hearing for comments. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed.

Upon call for the question of adoption of this ordinance and upon roll call vote, the following voted "aye": Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave,

Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - l2; voting "nay": none. Mayor Brown declared the ordinance adopted.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARING AND ISSUE FINAL ORDER
FOR DEMOLITION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDING AT
621 9TH AVENUE NORTH

The city auditor reported that notice of a hearing to be held this evening on the matter of substandard building or structure (warehouse) at 621 9th Avenue North had been mailed to the owner of the property, said property being in substandard condition.

Mayor Brown asked if there was anyone present to submit any pertinent facts concerning the matter to the council. There were none and Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

There was some discussion as to the method of collection of the demolition costs if the City were to demolish the substandard buildings - that Section 10-0406 provides that we can levy it as a special assessment against the land or the City could proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the costs, and that the city attorney collect through an action at law and that we reserve the option to levy the special assessments only if we can't collect.

Mr. Swanson stated they would do that, however, one of the issues that need to be resolved is whether or not there is an existing mortgage or other liens against the premises; if we were to pursue a collection action rather than a special assessment, we may not have the priority that a special assessment would have. He stated in a special assessment if it's not paid by the property owner, there is a 5-year period of time before default can be declared and before you can acquire the property; in the case of a judgment, the judgment is dischargeable in bankruptcy, you may or may not be able to collect on a judgment, so each one requires an individual analysis, and in the past have always gone with special assessments.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that we find the structure to be substandard as defined by Section 10-0401, subsections (1) (2) (3) (5) and (8), of the City Code, that a final order of demolition be issued, that order would be stayed for a period of 30 days pending any potential appeal, and that the building be demolished by the City of Grand Forks and proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the cost thereof and that we reserve the option to levy costs as a special assessment against the land upon which the building stands or did stand. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARING AND ISSUE FINAL ORDER
FOR DEMOLITION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDING AT
720 NORTH 4TH STREET

The city auditor reported that notice of a hearing to be held this evening on the matter of substandard building or structure (garage) at 720 North 4th Street had been mailed to the owner of the property, said property being in substandard condition.

Mayor Brown asked if there was anyone present to submit any pertinent facts concerning the matter to the council. There were none and Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that we find the structure to be substandard as defined by Section 10-0401, subsections (1) (3) (5) (8) and (9), of the City Code, that a final order of demolition be issued, that order would be stayed for a period of 30 days pending any potential appeal, and that the building be demolished by the City of Grand Forks and proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the cost thereof and that we reserve the option to levy costs as a special assessment against the land upon which the building stands or did stand. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARING AND ISSUE FINAL ORDER
FOR DEMOLITION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDING AT
1003 2ND AVENUE NORTH

The city auditor reported that notice of a hearing to be held this evening on the matter of substandard building or structure (dwelling) at 1003 2nd Avenue North had been mailed to the owner of the property, said property being in substandard condition.

Mayor Brown asked if there was anyone present to submit any pertinent facts concerning the matter to the council. There were none and Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that we find the structure to be substandard as defined by Section 10-0401, subsections (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (8) and (9), of the City Code, that a final order of demolition be issued, that order would be stayed for a period of 30 days pending any potential appeal, and that the building be demolished by the City of Grand Forks and proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the cost thereof and that we reserve the option to levy costs as a special assessment against the land upon which the building stands or did stand. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

HOLD PUBLIC HEARING AND ISSUE FINAL ORDER
FOR DEMOLITION OF SUBSTANDARD BUILDING AT
1121 1ST AVENUE NORTH

The city auditor reported that notice of a hearing to be held this evening on the matter of substandard building or structure (dwelling and garage) at 1121 1st Avenue North had been mailed to the owner of the property, said property being in substandard condition.

Mayor Brown asked if there was anyone present to submit any pertinent facts concerning the matter to the council. There were none and Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that we find the structures to be substandard as defined by Section 10-0401, subsections (1) (2) (3) (5) (7) (8) and (9), of the City Code, that a final order of demolition be issued, that order would be stayed for a period of 30 days pending any potential appeal, and that the building be demolished by the City of Grand Forks and proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the cost thereof and that we reserve the option to levy costs as a special assessment against the land upon which the building stands or did stand. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

ISSUE FINAL ORDER FOR DEMOLITION OF SUB-
STANDARD BUILDING AT 1002 2ND AVENUE NORTH

The city auditor reported that notice of a hearing to be held this evening on the matter of substandard building or structure (dwelling) at 1002 2nd Avenue North had been mailed to the owner of the property, said property being in substandard condition.

Mayor Brown asked if there was anyone present to submit any pertinent facts concerning the matter to the council. There were none and Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

Council Member Hamerlik asked if the response to Mr. Nephew's letter of April 14, or any compromise or agreement with the property owner re. his request for additional time. Ms. Collings, building and zoning administrator, stated that Mr. Nephew was requesting 60 days on April 14 and that would be the middle of June; and they have not seen any significant progress on the property in the last three and one-half weeks. Council Member Gershman stated at the time Mr. Nephew was at the meeting he suggested that he should possibly clean up his property because there were things strewn around and that he drove by there on Saturday and nothing had been done since the last council meeting.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that we find the structure to be substandard as defined by Section 10-0401, subsections (1) (3) (5) (6) (7) (8) and (9), of the City Code, that a final order of demolition be issued, that order would be stayed for a period of 30 days pending any potential appeal, and that the building be demolished by the City of Grand Forks and proceed with a suit of law against the owner to collect the cost thereof and that we reserve the option to levy costs as a special assessment against the land upon which the building stands or did stand. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

DETERMINE INSUFFICIENCY OF PROTEST ON PAVING
DISTRICT NO. 584, PROJECT NO. 5328

The city auditor reported that the period for filing protests on the resolution of necessity for the improvements in and for Paving District No. 584, Project No. 5328, paving on Linden Court from 10th Avenue South to 15th Avenue South, had expired on May 2, 2002, and that he had received protests from property owners totaling 42.8% of the area in the district.

Mayor Brown called upon the audience to see if there was anyone present who had comments to make on this matter.

Clay Whitmore, 1202 Linden Court, stated he understood that the project is going to go through; that Linden Court is a dirt road and has been deteriorating since the flood, that this project is needed and majority of homeowners are ready to go forward with the project. Mr. Swanson stated that with the protest that has been reported, it is an insufficient protest to automatically stop the project; council, however, can utilize its judgment and decide not to move forward with the project if they choose to; to stop the project automatically it would require more than 50% of the area within the district.

Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

Council Member Martinson introduced the following resolution as to protests, which was presented and read: Document No. 8161 - Resolution.

It was moved by Council Member Martinson and seconded by Council Member Kreun that we do hereby find and determine an insufficiency of protest against Paving District No. 584, Project No. 5328, as no protests were filed, and further that the resolution be and is hereby adopted. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

APPROVE BUDGET AMENDMENT

The staff report from municipal court relating to the request for carry-over money to be used to scan documents, with recommendation to approve carry-over money, $1,485.00, to be used to scan documents.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

ACCEPT BID FOR CHILLER UNIT FOR POLICE BUILDING

The staff report from the police department relating to bid package for chiller unit for the police building, with recommendation to approve the low bid of Midwest Refrigeration in the amount of $65,953.00.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted "aye": Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; voting "nay": none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

ACCEPT BID FOR PROJECT NO. 5296, WATERMAIN
REPLACEMENT FOR 2002

The staff report from the engineering department relating to consideration of bids for City Project No. 5296, 2002 Watermain Replacement on 17th Avenue South, 9th Avenue North, 19th Avenue South and 25th Avenue South, with recommendation to award contract to low bidder Soberaski, Inc. in the amount of $279,602.00.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted "aye": Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; voting "nay": none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried and the contract awarded.

APPROVE AMENDMENT TO ENGINEERING SERVICES
AGREEMENT, PROJECT NO. 5240, PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SERVICES FOR PERMANENT FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT

The staff report from the engineering department relating to Amendment No. 21 to engineering services agreement with GFEG for Project No. 5240, Project Management Services for the permanent flood protection project, with recommendation to approve Amendment No 21 with Greater Forks Engineering Group for project management services in the amount not to exceed $160,000.00.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted "aye": Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; voting "nay": none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

APPROVE AMENDMENT TO ENGINEERING SERVICES
AGREEMENT, PROJECT NO. 5230

The staff report from the engineering department relating to Amendment No. 1 to agreement with Webster, Foster & Weston for Pump Station Telemetry Upgrade, City Project No. 5230, with recommendation to approve Amendment No. 1 to agreement with Webster, Foster & Weston in the amount of $32,123.00.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon roll call the following voted "aye": Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; voting "nay": none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND
AWARDING SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDING
BONDS (HOTEL/MOTEL TAX), SERIES 2002D, CREATING
A SINKING FUND THEREFOR, AND LEVYING TAXES FOR
THEIR PAYMENT

The staff report from the finance department relating to issuance and award of sale of General Obligation Bonds (Hotel/Motel Tax) Series 2002D, with recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the issuance and awarding the sale of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Hotel/Motel Tax), Series 2002D, creating a sinking fund therefor, and levying taxes for their payment.

Alan Erickson, Springsted Incorporated, stated they discussed these issues about five weeks ago at the committee of the whole meeting, these are refinancing of existing issues, and that they took bids in his office today in behalf of the City and the results were excellent. He stated the first issue was $750,000 Refunding of the 1995A Hotel/Motel Tax Bond, and through the restructuring of this not only save on the coupon interest rate but also to shorten the term of this bond by 6 years, affecting other savings as well, and final maturity will be in 2009 as opposed to the original date of 2015; the low bid was 3.5727% from Wachovia Bank in Charlotte, NC, future value savings of over quarter of a million dollars and present value of over $90,000 in that issue; the second bid was $1,100,000 Sewer Reserve Refunding and refunds the 1994D original issue, low bid was 3.6755% from Isaak Bond Investments, Inc. in Denver, CO, present value savings in that issue of over $111,000 and between the two issues, less than $2 million of par bonds issued on the refinancing, received well over $200,000 in savings on present value basis; the bids were outstanding and would recommend that you accept them both. He stated that bids out of Denver, CO and Charlotte, NC and people around the country are interested in the credit and made for some very interesting competitive bidding this morning.

The city auditor presented an affidavit showing publication in the official newspaper of the City of the Official Terms of Offering of $750,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Hotel/Motel Tax), Series 2002D (the "Bonds") of the City, bids for which were to be considered at this meeting as provided by resolution adopted April 15, 2002. The affidavit was examined and approved and ordered placed on file.
The city auditor reported that three (3) sealed bids for the purchase of the Bonds had been received from the following institutions at or before the time stated in the Official Terms of Offering, and the bids were then opened and publicly read and considered, and were all found to conform to the Official Terms of Offering and to be accompanied by the required security, and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each bid were found to be as follows: Document No. 8162 - Bids)
Council Member Bakken introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson: Document No. 8162.1 - Resolution.

Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.

ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND
AWARDING SALE OF SEWER RESERVE REVENUE
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2002E

The staff report from the finance department relating to issuance and award of sale of Sewer Reserve Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2002E, with recommendation to adopt resolution authorizing the issuance and awarding the sale of Sewer Reserve Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2002E.

The city auditor presented an affidavit showing publication in the official newspaper of the City of the Notice of Bond Sale of $1,100,000 Sewer Reserve Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 200E (the "Bonds") of the City, bids for which were to be considered at this meeting as provided by resolution adopted April 15, 2002. The affidavit was examined and approved and ordered placed on file.

The city auditor reported that three (3) sealed bids for the purchase of the Bonds had been received from the following institutions at or before the time stated in the Notice of Bond Sale, and the bids were then opened and publicly read and considered, and were all found to conform to the Notice of Bond Sale and to be accompanied by the required security, and the purchase price, interest rates and net interest cost under the terms of each bid were found to be as follows: Document No. 8163 - Bids.

Council Member Bakken introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson: Document No. 8163.1 - Resolution.

Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.

ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLEDGE OF ADDITIONAL
REVENUES TO OUTSTANDING SEWER RESERVE REVENUE
BONDS

The city auditor reported that an additional resolution that is required to be adopted, in which we need to change some of our pledged revenues on earlier bond issues that we have had and they are listed in that document.

Council Member Bakken introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by Council Member Martinson: Document No. 8164 - Resolution.

Upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12: and the following

voted against the same: none; whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.

TABLE RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF A STATE APPROVED
SOLUTION TO THE DEVILS LAKE FLOODING CRISIS

The staff report from the administrative coordinator relating to the Devils Lake resolution, with recommendation to approve the Devils Lake resolution.

Council Member Kreun reported the same resolution had been presented to the Chamber of Commerce Board meeting for their action, and that the County Commission has not passed this resolution at this time either and would like to come as one voice from the Chamber, the County and the City together, and asked if the council would table this and bring back a resolution with some additional information on it concerning basin wide issues that were raised but are not in the resolution. He moved to table this issue and bring it back at the next committee of the whole for review and vote on at the council meeting two weeks from now. Council Member Gershman seconded the motion to table. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

COUNCIL MEMBER KLAVE TELECONFERENCE
DISCONNECTED (TELECONFERENCE SYSTEM CUT OUT)

DIRECT MAYOR TO APPOINT A GROUP TO COMMUNI-
CATE WITH THE COUNTY AND THE AIRPORT AUTHORITY
BOARD

The staff report from the city attorney's office relating to the first reading of an ordinance amending Section 20-0206(1) relating to members of the Airport Authority Board, with recommendation to approve the ordinance.

It was moved by Council Member Stevens that we pass this ordinance with an amendment that we limit members appointed by the mayor to one term. Council Member Martinson seconded the amendment.

Council Member Brooks stated that what the council needs to vote on is the fact that we have four mills levied for the airport that is our responsibility and we need to have membership on that board, an elected official, and that he is not in favor of term limits.

Council Member Gershman stated he has some concern about having a council member automatically on the Board because of possibly politicizing the airport authority, and the taxing authority the airport has is by State Statute, and that is not something we are going to control; the mill levies for the airport is a small portion of their budget, their resources are from concessions, landing fees, rents, federal grants, etc. and having a city council member on the airport authority isn't going to change that.

Upon call for the question on the matter of the amendment and upon voice vote, the motion was defeated by a vote of 8 to 3, Council Members Bjerke, Stevens, Martinson voted against the motion.

Council Member Brooks stated that we are elected officials and are responsible for the city mills to the airport authority and should have an elected official sitting on that board, and moved to amend the ordinance to leave under item 1, to change the members from 7 to 6 and include item c, the one member from the city council and delete item d, which makes reference to the county commission. Council Member Christensen seconded the motion.

Council Member Brooks stated that we need to go to the County with this as presumptuous to include the county commissioner until we have had discussions with the County, and would hope that the mayor, should this pass, would appoint a group of council members and staff to visit with the County and work out the details with them.

Council Member Christensen stated his concerns, that there is some dissatisfaction with a certain segment of this community as to how our airport is being run, but believes that when we create commissions or authorities then we transfer the responsibility that we would have had ourselves for governance and for review to that group and entrusted them the responsibility to do that; and if there is a concern that it's time to review the activities to create a task force and could have some cooperation and some consultation among the affected groups with the Commission and after 45 to 60 days if there is a problem to address and deal with it after receiving the information after deliberation and make an informed decision with all the parties at the table.

Council Member Hamerlik stated we didn't have to change the ordinance but that the mayor could appoint a city council member as one of those three members.

Council Member Gershman stated that the Airport Authority has the ability to tax and the independence of that Authority is very important, that he was a member of the Board for 5 years, and they had extremely serious problems at various times - general aviation and fixed based operator - that the majority of those grievances are now before the Federal Aviation Administration and they will issue directives to the Airport Authority whether the fixed base operator is correct or the general aviation is correct, and when those directives come down there is nothing the city council can do about that and nothing the Airport Authority is going to do about that, but decided in Washington, D.C.

After further discussion and upon call for the question on the motion to introduce the ordinance, as drafted, with the following changes: deletion of subsection d in its entirety and inclusion of subsection c, and effect would be to have a 6-member body with 3 members being residents of the city of Grand Forks appointed by the mayor, confirmed by the city council; two residents of the county of Grand Forks appointed by the Grand Forks County Commission and one member of the Grand Forks City council for first reading and upon roll call vote, the following voted "aye": Council Members Hamerlik, Glassheim, Martinson, Brooks, Bjerke - 5; and the following voted against the motion: Council Members Gershman, Christensen, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Stevens - 6. Mayor Brown declared the motion defeated.

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Gershman that the mayor put together a group to communicate with the county commission and with the airport authority board to find out if there is a reason to change the makeup of the commission. Carried 10 votes affirmative; Council Member Bjerke voted against the motion.