Council Minutes

Minutes/Committee of the Whole
Monday, February 14, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, February 14, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were: Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Gershman, Christensen, Kerian (teleconference), Kreun - 6; absent: Council Member Glassheim - 1.

Mayor Brown announced that Boy Scout 20 from Calvary Lutheran Church and leaders were in the audience working on their community citizenship merit badge and asked that they lead the council in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

Mayor Brown announced that when addressing the committee to please come forward to use the microphone for the record, and advised that the meeting is being televised live and taped for later broadcast.

Mayor Brown commented on various events held during the past week and upcoming events:
He stated it was with sadness that we heard that Dean O'Kelly passed away last week and he will be remembered with fondness and gratitude and our thoughts are with his friends and family.
That he just came from speaking to the local Cub Scout Pack 120 who had their blue and gold banquet this evening, and is proud of character of our youth and people.
Last week Grand Forks received positive news about the Canad Inn submitting their site plans and at same time Grand Forks City and Economic Development leaders were meeting with the Canadian business people and with Mayor of Winnipeg and Premier of Manitoba, and were very productive meetings and important to this community and region, especially as we expand our business with Canadians and our business opportunities with Canadian companies.
Next week is Municipal Government Week, February 21-25, sponsored by ND League of Cities, and this year holding an "If I were Mayor for a Day" contest and other efforts between local citizens and local government. He stated they have about 120 essays he would like the council to review and help pick the winner of "If I were Mayor for a Day" and to let him know when you have time.

PRESENTATION BY NOVAC

Nicole Derenne, executive director of North Valley Arts Council, asked the council to accept her thanks on behalf of the arts community for support of our regional arts and culture. She stated she had placed before council members the re-grant report and annual report and examples of activities that were supported last year. She stated that the funds that are provided by the city council support Greater Grand Forks non-profit arts and cultural organizations and these funds are re-granted by the NOVAC, that this year 15 arts and cultural organizations have received support.

She stated included in the report is their annual report which lists some of their activities from the past year, include dissemination of calendar of events by e-mail, newsletter, updates to their website; and noted a number of grants that they have received over the past year. She noted there were some changes in their organization with new board members, Julie Rig, president; and Alex Reichert who has been elected into their board. She again thanked the council for their support of arts in our regional community and hope that they will continue to determine that NOVAC is the appropriate agency to continue to administer the re-grant program.

2.1 Engineering services agreement for Project No. 5817, Rehabilitation of Lift Station No. 16.____________________________________________________
Council Member Gershman asked if this was the Dave Berry lift station, that we need to send him a letter to let him know how respected he is in Grand Forks that we are going to upgrade his lift station; Mayor stated they would delegate Pete Haga to do that.

Council Member Hamerlik questioned use of the generator, and if this was a wise decision, based on the age of the generator and maintenance it may require. Cindy Voigt, asst. city engineer, stated that they need to check feasibility that generator will work and that they will be allowed to use the generator purchased previously with federal dollars, that they may not be able to use it, move it or use for different purpose and will check on that.

2.2 Bids for Project No. 5790 and 5791, Lift Station 183 and 190 Pump Inspection/Repair._________________________________________
Hamerlik asked if Water Smith has done work for the City in the past, and are satisfied with the work that they do. Ms. Voigt stated yes.

2.3 Cost Participation, Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Project No.5672, paving 55th Ave.S. (Belmont Road to Cherry Street) _________
Hamerlik asked for brief explanation of City's participation and how solicited. Ms. Voigt stated the City participation is out of urban funds, 80%-20% split, and remaining non-eligible cost were proposing to have special assessed on agenda item 2.12; that this agenda item deals strictly with agreement with NDDoT that stated they will do certain things, providing us the money to do the bidding and City will follow through with its share of the agreement.

2.4 Cost Participation, Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Project No. 5673, mill and overlay North 20th Street (University Avenue to Gateway Drive)____________________________________________________________
Kerian asked for explanation. Ms. Voigt stated that the $324,000 is determined when we do our urban request which is twice a year and we estimated that we would need $324,000 and the State programs that amount, and that was determined several years ago.

2.5 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5776, District No. 436, sanitary sewer for Southbrook Addition.___________________________
There were no comments.

2.6 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5777, District No. 284, watermain for Southbrook Addition.______________________________
There were no comments.

2.7 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5778, District No.437, storm sewer for Southbrook Addition.____________________________
There were no comments.
2.8 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5779, District No. 612, paving Southbrook Addition.____________________________________
There were no comments

2.9 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5767, District No. 610, paving S. 20th St. from 36th Ave.S. to 40th Ave.S.___________________
This item was pulled by the engineering department.

2.10 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5824, District No. 157, street light on S. 20th St. from 36th Ave.S. to 40th Ave.S._____________
This item was pulled by the engineering department.

2.11 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5702, paving 40th Ave.S. (S. 20th Street to Reummele Road).______________________________________
Kerian noted there had been a hearing on this project and that there was a
question about impact on Reummele Road, and what results were. Mike Korman,
consultant engineer, reported that the concern was the amount of traffic on Reummele
Road, some dates back to the construction on Columbia Road and lot of people used that
route, resident's concern was with building this road was increased traffic in front of his
house. He stated that as this area gets developed, there are a lot of town homes under
construction which will generate more traffic; and in the future the City is looking at
extending 40th to do a connection directly onto 34th and when that project is done, will
alleviate some of the traffic concerns.

The city auditor stated on the future assessment issue we have found out that we can use the same depreciation schedule that we do for the tapping area so there is a
deferred depreciation on these projects and as they come in and if have not started their
depreciation, we can assess the entire principal amount over the same term and can also
collect back the interest that the City would have paid on that project during the 4 or 5
years that the property wasn't in the city to be assessed.

Gershman stated that where we have development going on and would think that
homeowners would prefer concrete rather than gravel, and as Columbia Road is now
constructed, that would reduce the traffic.

Mr. Swanson stated they have adopted a tapping fee policy, that this is a future assess-
ment policy, that he doesn't believe that the council needs to take any further action, but
if wish to have a policy statement may do so, but the authority provided by State Statute
and by the local ordinance is sufficient to allow the finance department to impose the
finance charges in addition to that and as we have designated future assessment areas
should also be identifying the appropriate depreciation schedules, interest based upon the
bond sales; but if want a separate handout on that, that can be drafted and provided.
Christensen stated they should so it wouldn't fall between the cracks for later councils,
and to include the depreciation schedule that we have come up with in our various
meetings so there is no confusion and have continuity. He stated that the same procedure
that Mr. Swanson and the city auditor are discussing is the procedure that we're imple-
menting for the reallocation of special assessments for the flood control project as
property comes into the city.

Mr. Grasser stated they should have included the depreciation schedule in the staff report
and will get that out between the COW and the council meeting. He also noted that on
40th Avenue South, it is not a question of whether 40th is going to get paved but a matter
of who is going to end up paying for it, 40th would get paved because the development
that is going on there will have to be paved under a non-federally assisted project and
would be assessed 100% to the adjacent properties, trying to alleviate some of the burden
by bringing in the federal dollars to pay for it, and this is a good method when we have
the drainway on one side and helps get around where some of those issues about where
those costs and benefits be distributed to. He stated they are having some discussions
with the Park District contemplating ways for 40th Avenue to extend farther to the west
which would also help to alleviate the potential problem and may hear about that in the
near future.

2.12 Create special assessment for Project No. 5672, paving 55th Ave.S. (Belmont Road to Cherry Street)._____________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.13 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5703, paving 47th Ave.S. (S. Washington St. to Cherry St.)________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.14 Lincoln Drive Park Trail Connection in the Greenway.
There were no comments.

2.15 Bids for fire simulator trainer for flammable liquids and gases (FLAG Trainer).____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.16 Request to accept vehicle bids, police department.
Council Member Brooks stated that we will be trading in some vehicles in the bid process and when looking at values - that we hold auction once a year and perhaps run those through the auction, Chief Packett stated each year have dealers and appraisers come out and look at the fleet and the appraised value that they will put on a trade-in is pretty much what they would see at an auction.

2.17 Request from Planning Department for final approval of an ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article 2, Zoning, Section 18-0204, Rules and Definitions, subsection (2) Definitions; Section 18-0301, Signs, subsection (9), paragraph (b), all relating to ground monument signs. (public hearing and second reading of the ordinance have been continued to February 22)______________________________________________________
Gershman stated that report says that two ground signs would be permitted on corner lots and double frontage lots, which means they would be 18 ft. by 8 ft. and intrusive sign and questioned why double signs on a corner. Dennis Potter, city planner,
stated they have had this debate in the office over what happens with corner monument signs and if look at the Code, should only have one at that size and if go with two because of the way the sign sq. footage requirements are set up, you would end up with smaller ones or force the owner to pick one corner or the other. Gershman stated very few locations have the intensity of traffic going four ways, and would like to see if could amend that and have one sign because would be foolish to do an L-shaped sign because one side would block the other. Mr. Potter stated they could leave it at one because still in a draft stage. Gershman stated he wanted to clarify - that there could be a sign on the corner of 36 ft., 18 ft. one way and 18 ft. the other and 8 ft. and have a bad looking city - will send back and get it done.

Christensen stated this started out by developing a policy so that South Forks Center could take their reader board sign off the pylon and put it on the ground on top of some concrete - rather let's give them a conditional use permit and move on. Kreun stated that this particular ordinance is not for that particular business, have that one taken care of, and this is for the reader board type signs which they might use at South Forks or Grand Cities Mall as well but in agreement that wasn't the intent of putting a large sign or two smaller signs next to each other to form an L - and what Mr. Potter is suggesting will take this back and change that.

2.18 Request from CPS, LTD. on behalf of Southern Estates LLP for final approval of the plat of Southern Estates Fourth Addn. (located west of S. 20th St. and north of 44th Ave. S.) (public hearing and second reading of ordinance to amend Street & Highway Plan scheduled for February 22)
There were no comments.

2.19 Request from CPS, LTD. on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for final approval of the Replat of Lot 1, Block 2, Southbrook First Addition (loc. south of 48th Ave. S. and between Curran Court). (public hearing and second reading of ordinance to amend Street & Highway Plan scheduled for February 22)_____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.20 Request on behalf of City of Grand Forks for final (fast track) approval of
the plat/replat of Flaat's Sixth Resubdiv. (loc in 3100 blk. of Elmwood Dr.)
Mr. Walker stated there are existing homes on these lots, privately owned and property owners just purchased the remnant pieces of land that the City had left over.

2.21 Request on behalf of City of Grand Forks for final (fast track) approval of the Sprucewood Resubdiv. (loc. on Spruce Court)._____________________
There were no comments.
2.22 Request on behalf of City of Grand Forks and Ivan Jensen for final (fast track) approval of the plat/replat of Jensen's Addn. (loc. at 3707 Belmont Road)._________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.23 Request from CPS, LTD on behalf of Vernon and Judith Gornowicz for preliminary approval of Vern's Southern Estates First Addn. (loc. in 1900 blk. of 47th Ave. S.)______________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.24 Request from Vern and Judith Gornowicz for approval of annexation of Vern's Southern Estates First Addn. (loc. in 1900 blk. of 47th Ave. S.)___
There were no comments.

2.25 Request from CPS, LTD. on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for preliminary approval of the Southbrook Third Resubdiv, being a replat of Lot 18, Blk. 1, Southbrook Second Addn. (loc. in 1500 blk. of 48th Ave. S.)
There were no comments.

2.26 Petition from Turning Point LLC for approval to vacate access easement lying within Lot G, Block B and adjacent to Lots 3 through 11, Block B, Village Resubdiv. No. 2 (loc. west of N. 42nd St. between 5th Ave. N. and University Ave.)________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.27 Petition from Guy Useldinger for approval of an ordinance to annex all of Southern Estates Fourth Addn, (loc. west of S. 20th St. and north of 44th Ave. S.)_________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.28 Request from CPS, LTD on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for preliminary approval of a plat of Homestead Grove First Addn. (loc. in 4600 blk. of S. Washington St.)____________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.29 Request from CPS, LTD. on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend the zoning map to rezone and exclude from A-1 (Limited Development) District and to include within Homestead Grove PUD (Planned Unit Development), Concept Development Plan, all of Homestead Grove First Addn. and unplatted portions of the West Half of SE Quarter of Section 22, Twp.151N, R50W of the 5th Principal Meridian (loc. east of S. Washington St. between 40th Ave. S. and 47th Ave. S.)_______________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.30 Petition from Crary Development, Inc. for approval of an ordinance to annex all of Homestead Grove First Addn. and to include adj. property thereof. (located in 4600 blk. of S. Washington St.)______________________________
There were no comments.

2.31 Request for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article 9, Subdivision Regulations, repealing and re-enacting Section 18-0906, Procedure, relating to subdivision regulations and procedures._______________________________________________________
Mr. Swanson stated this is a re-write of subdivision requirements and the draft was prepared in the Planning Department and does not meet the requirement they would need for Code adoption, and that there are some substantive issues that need to be reviewed; that he will be asking that it be held without going on the agenda next week or next week ask that it will be held for a period of time to give their office the opportunity to work with the draft.

Kerian stated she would like to see if there are notification procedures, needs to have legal notice but if moving this process along, see that our citizens are aware of it - and asked if there is something that could be written to give notice to property owners around those plats.

2.32 Request from CPS, LTD on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for preliminary approval of a plat of Prairiewood First Addn. (loc. south of Adams Drive and east of Belmont Road).__________________________
There were no comments.

2.33 Request from CPS, LTD on behalf of Crary Development, Inc. for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend the zoning map to rezone and exclude from the A-2 (Agricultural Reserve) District and to include within the R-1 (Single-Family Residence) District all of Prairiewood First Addn. (loc. east of S. Washington St. between 40th Ave. S. and 47th Ave. S.)____
There were no comments.

2.34 Petition from Crary Development, Inc. for approval of an ordinance to annex
all of Prairiewood First Addn. (loc. in 5600 blk. of Belmont Road)__________
There were no comments.

2.35 Advance Refunding of Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 1997A.
There were no comments.

2.36 Pension and Insurance Committee appointment.
There were no comments.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 City Auditor's Portfolio Management/Summary as of January 31, 2005.
Informational - no comments.

5 ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR COMMENTS

Rick Duquette, administrative coordinator, reported last week he met with Civil Service Commission and asked them to approve a search committee, consisting of 2 civil service commissioners, 1 city council member, 2 employee reps., 1 department head, administrative coordinator and the community government relations officer and from that committee ask that there be a sub-committee of 4 persons, 1 employee rep., 1 department head and 1 civil service commissioner and himself to go through the initial resumes and applications, essentially the process will be a telephone pre-screening and a series of finalist interviews; and goal was to be completed by week of April 18 for HR director search. He stated ads went out today in professional publications and regional newspapers; that this is a civil service position and that was a necessity of having the search committee approved by that method.

Brooks stated this position is crucial, that there are firms that go out and do search and if there was any consideration to that. Mr. Duquette stated there was and talked to 3 different firms but at this point feels comfortable at putting together our own selection committee. Hamerlik stated they voted some time ago that this be a civil service position rather than appointed position under contract.

Christensen stated he didn't know if that position has been filled for more than 10 months during his time on the council 4 years, and if a position isn't filled for 6 to 12 months, maybe consider the necessity of the position - but have heard that we should become more efficient and consolidate things, and some people's desire to fill this position because it is a crucial position but also concerned that we let those shown in leadership positions internally within our staff to apply for the position or if performing as part of their services or duties HR functions and would like to discuss that with Mr. Duquette and wondering if couldn't consolidate a position or two and build more responsibility for some high quality individuals on our staff - and as to began the budgeting process and before going too much further with hiring someone else and review Mr. Duquette's ideas as to how the position could be consolidated or how eliminate a lesser position and move a person into that position and add to that person's responsibilities. This presents a good opportunity for review of positions and could have recommendations before moving farther along.

Gershman stated there was some discussion about consolidation and didn't get a lot of traction because some people felt this position has to be very highly educated in HR to do it and was supportive of Mr. Duquette's idea to roll it into another department because feels if have qualified manager you have qualified staff under you and staff has been doing it now and things seem to be going fairly well, but concern with Mr. Christensen's suggestion is that we send too many mixed messages from this council, and as go forward and come back and re-entertain that, and doing that too much, and not willing to pull it at this point and if we don't have qualified candidates, then we have to revisit what Mr. Christensen said and what Mr. Duquette stated last year.

Christensen stated that if we want to hang on to this position, HR, but remind council that as we go forward into the budgeting process and that those who advocate the call for decrease in spending, come up with concrete ideas where the savings can be met rather than laying on backs of Mr. Duquette, Mr. Schmisek so that cut spending but not tell them how or where or what would favor; but if suggest savings, better present ideas and implement them at the same time.

Hamerlik, Kerian and Brooks stated to proceed and get position filled. Kreun stated to continue to try to fill this position, but if it doesn't work again, take and evaluate other suggestions at the same time.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS

1) Council Member Brooks stated today is Valentine's Day thanked our spouses and also of staff.

2) Council Member Gershman stated that the number of lots being platted - 187 and lot of activity in Grand Forks and lot of development. He also commended Scout Troop for staying through the entire meeting.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that we adjourn. Carried 6 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor