Council Minutes

Minutes/Committee of the Whole
Monday, June 13, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, June 13, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. (following Growth Fund meeting) in the council chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were: Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Kerian, Kreun - 7; absent: none.

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:
Congratulations to ArtFest organizers and volunteers, opportunity to showcase downtown.
Second Annual Car Show - 200 cars featured and thanks to Jim and Janie Lyons, Lyons Auto.
Proclaimed June 14, 2005, as Greater Grand Forks Senior Citizens Assn. Day, proclamation was read.
He encouraged regional residents to attend the June 23 Base Rally and announced that the City is encouraging City's employees to attend this Rally, will continue to keep City offices open and services uninterrupted but based on the department heads and supervisors determination many employees should be able to attend the Rally as part of their job function. He stated it is crucial that this community has a strong showing of support at this Rally and important that City continue to take leadership role. He stated that this is not time off, but as City employees have a duty to serve citizens and community and supporting our Base serves our community, and encourage businesses to do whatever they can to insure a good crowd so together we can do everything we can to insure the best outcome from this BRAC process.
He welcomed UND Social Policy Class 454 to the council meeting tonight.

Al Grasser, city engineer, stated after rain received in the last couple weeks and this past weekend the river levels are rising, and latest forecast from the National Weather Service is predicting 41 ft. on Sunday or Monday, and is contingent upon rain that is going on now and supposed to rain all night, on and off showers, and heavier down south, and expect to see number change over time. He stated at 41 ft. won't see any clay hauling operations or sandbagging but storm pumps will be turned on and floodgates will be shut off to keep the city dry, and will shut those down as late in the process as can so that any precipitation events can flush through the system rather than pumping them, our pumping capacity is still somewhat limited compared to natural flow. He stated we have concerns about the sanitary sewer lift stations, not overtaxed at this time but are seeing heavy flows, and that we have a lot of sump pumps tied into the system, that it is illegal to have your sump pump tied into the sanitary sewer and ask all property owners to make sure they are disconnected and get the hoses out from sanitary and if experiencing some seepage make sure you have your sump hoses away from the house as far as you can and make sure your downspouts are directing flows away from the house to help keep seepage to a minimum.

Council Member Kerian stated she heard on the news today that Thompson is having some problems with their systems and asked if they need any assistance. Mr. Grasser stated they would check on that but not aware of any requests for aid at this point in time.

Council Member Hamerlik stated relative to storm sewers and over the weekend there are spots in town where sewers don't quite handle water, that 13th was pretty well flooded and asked if they take their sump pumps and dump into the street, if that would impact our storm sewer. Mr. Grasser stated the amount of water out of the sump pumps is very minor as compared to the rain and wouldn't be any impact on that. He stated there are a number of areas in town and very typical of problem areas they have identified in the past and a number of those are some of the sewers that were built under different design criteria in the 50's, and although have made some improvements on that system, there are still some significant issues, and also saw some problems in the south area. He stated one of the benefits as have spent significant dollars after the flood in repairing the sanitary sewer system, and sealed up a number of areas that were causing leakage and inflow, and now sump pump connections are biggest concern.

Council Member Brooks stated he and Council Member Gershman attended ArtFest Saturday and received from the Downtown Leadership Group a watercolor of Town Square, limited edition, and accepted it for the City's contribution and presented it to Mayor Brown. Council Member Gershman stated that the ArtFest Committee presented that to the major sponsors of the ArtFest.

2.1 Application for abatement for 2004 taxes by Dorothy Horner, 3982 Dacotah View Court________________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.2 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5818, Dist. 286, watermain for 44th Ave.S. between S. Washington and S. 16th St.
2.3 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5819, Dist. 439, storm sewer for 44th Ave.S. between S. Washington and the Southend Drainway
2.4 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5820, Dist. 616, paving 44th Ave.S. from S. Washington St. to Southend Drainway._______________________________
Council Member Christensen stated there was some differences in the districts, that in the
watermain project there is an exclusion of Second Curran's and in next project that is included
and asked why. Mr. Grasser stated the watermain project only goes to 16th St. and if the water
was going to be extended in the future would pick that up at that time, and the storm sewer and
paving projects extend into and/or through Curran's Subdivision. Christensen asked if we
approved the lift station extension at last meeting; Mr. Grasser stated they approved creating the
tapping area and now in the process of negotiating for land acquisition and includes area in
Project 5819 plus the land to the east; would include everything on the west side of Washington
and goes from 20th from 47th Ave.S. up to 32nd Ave.S and to the southend drainway. It was
noted that the residents in Curran's 2nd Subdiv. know that they have a potential assessment for
water.

2.5 Consideration of bids for Project Nos. 5772 and 5773, Dist. Nos. 435 and 285, sanitary sewer and watermain for Desiree Drive.________________________
2.6 Consideration of bids for Project No. 5842, Dist. No. 615, paving Adams Drive._________________________________________________________
2.7 Consideration of bids for Project No. 5811, paving Prairiewood Addn.
2.8 Consideration of bids for Project No. 5834, Dist. No. 614, paving Countryview 3rd Addn._________________________________________________________________
2.9 Consideration of bids for Project No. 5844, 2005 Bus Garage Repairs.
2.10 Consideration of bids for construction of Project no. 5742, 2005 ADA Curb Ramps._________________________________________________________
Council Member Gershman stated that protest period was over on several projects and
asked if there were any protests; there were no protests.

2.11 Cost Participation, Construction and Maintenance Agreement for Project No. 5627. Highway Safety Projects (Flashing Beacon on 17th Ave.S. and Battery Backup System for Signalized Intersection)._________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.12 Request for driveway widening at 1251 S. 48th Street.
Council Member Kreun stated that in the Industrial Park may want to look at Codes in
that area because of all the large trucks that go in and out and making change and would give our
engineering department the ability to make a wider driveway and wouldn't have to come back
with special request each time. Mayor Brown asked that Mr. Grasser look at that.

2.13 Greenway Betterment Funds for Project No. 5789, Community Greens Irrigation System._______________________________________________________________
Council Member Brooks stated that earlier looked at this project with a $30,000 budget
and now up to $55,000, and asked if this could be done in phases rather than drawing betterment
funds now. Mark Walker, asst. city engineer, stated when looked at laying out this project and
working with the $30,000 budget, and were prioritizing the areas and giving higher priorities in
base bid and using others as alternate bids, and that their intent was to bring in pipings and wiring
so could expand the project to sprinkle an entire area if budget limited to $30,000, could be done.
Christensen stated that the area covers the entire area shown on map attached and doing on both
east and west sides of DeMers Avenue. Mr. Walker stated they have tried to indicate area they
intend to sprinkle with the $55,000 budget and is the area shown and includes both sides, north
and south side of the community greens. Gershman stated he would be in favor of including it
because time will come when need sprinkling and better cost efficiency if do it all at once, and
money is there and recommend approving this next week.

2.14 Utility Relocation Agreement with Qwest Communications for Project No. 5635, GF Flood Protection Project, Phase 4, Utility Relocates.___________________________
There were no comments.

2.15 Snowmobiling in the Greenway.
Council Member Kreun asked if we are going to have a groomed trail and what is the actual snowcat portion we are going to add to this, that in the past have had trail through the community to get to gas stations, eating places, and asked if going to have trails going through the greenway where kids are snowshoeing, sledding, etc. and how work. Mayor Brown stated that is a council policy decision. Mr. Walker stated they are asking council and included in the packet are a number of snowmobile trails throughout the city, and there has been a request by the snowmobile clubs and individuals riding snowmobiles that they include trails in the greenway as well, and brought before Flood Protection Comm. and then referred to council to give consideration if we should go ahead with considering trails in the greenway, and if that is the desire, city staff would work with snowmobile clubs to establish those trails and bring back for recommendation. Kreun stated these are motorized vehicles and are going to be behind the residences and all may not stay on the groomed trail and in summertime why not have motorized vehicles or four-wheelers and add a concern and more traffic. Last year had kids doing their sledding and snowcats kept coming closer and had some instances where some close calls, and he would like to have this scrutinized if we allow trails for snowcats through the greenway and find out which ones would be available and how close to residences and how close to sledding areas and asking what considering or leave it up to council.

Mr. Walker stated they haven't talked with the snowmobile group as to which trails they were looking at, you mentioned four-wheelers, motorbikes, etc. and that hasn't been in the conversation but understands it could be the next thing; they are hoping to sit down with snowmobile group and establish a route and try to keep as far away from the levees and residences as possible, avoiding areas that the Park District would use for cross-country skiing as well as sledding. Kreun stated in the past have designated routes to get from one end of town to the other and have spots where they can load and unload to be able to get to those trails to get to out of town trails, and in favor of that but doesn't know if want to enhance and bring more trails closer to the residential areas and other activities.

Gershman stated he had those comments in the Flood Protection Committee and question is that the public's expectation that the greenway is a peaceful place where can walk, bike and not hearing motorized vehicles, people in snowmobile clubs are responsible, but have others and has a concern that if authorize motorized vehicles that what would be logic for precluding that in the summertime for all terrain vehicles and this is a request to study this, and have a week to hear from citizens to contact newspaper, call talk shows or e-mail council members and need to hear from the public.

Kerian stated one of her concerns is it seemed that with snowmobile advocates and working with the technical team that perhaps should be some other representatives from the community who have properties along that area, and wildlife and habitat for birding and a number of activities that we want to happen along the greenway may be impacted by this, and interested in hearing from people.

Christensen stated he believes to begin the discussion of a policy could lead to a policy and if beginning to hear that there may not be a consensus to begin the discussion of a policy for now;
that on the East Side as part of their negotiations they retained ownership of their land to the river so there wouldn't be snowmobiles in back or vehicles and choice they had; and knows it would be a matter of great concern to the citizens who reside along the river, and agrees with issue about habitat for wildlife and would like to hear from the public.

Brooks stated that he thought people who rode snowmobiles generally wanted to get outside of town and travel from town to town, and would like to hear what people have to say.

2.16 Request for final approval of Replat of Lots 6 and 7, River Oaks Addn. (loc. on River Oaks Circle)____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.17 Request for petition to vacate portion of S. 16th R/W south of 44th Ave.S. between Curran's 2nd Subdiv. and Stadter Resubdiv.________________________________
There were no comments.

2.18 Request from ICON Architects on behalf of Grand Forks County for variance to the Land Development Code, Article 9, Subdivision Regulations, Section 18-0907; subsection (2) R/W; Paragraph (L) R/W Access; subparagraph 3, relating to R/W access to principal arterial streets for Lot 7, Block 1, Fairgrounds Third Resubdiv. (loc. in 1600 block of N. Washington Street).________________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.19 Request from HDD, Inc. for vacation of 20-foot wide utility easement being 10 feet on each side of the line common to Lots J and K, Block 2, Perkins Fourth Addition. (loc. at 3696 and 3697 Balsam Circle).______________________________________
There were no comments.

2.20 Request from CPS, Ltd on behalf of City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Perkins 1st Addition (loc. in 3200 blk of S. Columbia Road._________________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.21 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of replat of Lot A, Block 1 of Replat of Lots 1 and 4, Blk. 1, Perkins 1st Addn. (loc. in 3300 block of S. Columbia Road)._________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.22 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of replat of Lot 3, Block 2, Perkins 3rd Addn. (loc, west of Columbia Road and north of 36th Ave.S.)_____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.23 Request from CPS, Ltd on behalf of the City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of the replat of Lot 1, Block 1, Columbia Mall Second Resubdiv. (loc. west of Columbia Road and south of 24th Ave.S.__________________________________
There were no comments.

2.24 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Stadter Center for preliminary approval of Stadter Second Resubdiv. (loc. in 4500 block of S. Washington Street._______________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.25 Request from City of Grand Forks on behalf of Kermit and Patricia Rickford for preliminary approval of the Plat of Countryside Acres Addn. (loc. on Columbia Road and Merrifield Road)_____________________________________________
2.26 Request from City of Grand Forks on behalf of Lawrence Johnson, etal, for preliminary approval of the Wheatland Acres Subdiv. (loc. at Columbia Road and Merrifield Road)._______________________________________________________
Christensen asked how the projects that are on Merrifield Road impact our corridor study,
and what is going on with the corridor study or if we will have something soon on the
study. Dennis Potter, city planner, stated he wasn't sure where the corridor study is in
terms of timing but these rights of way are related to land purchases relating to what has
to be done to Merrifield Road for the dike raise when we come through there and build
that road. It was noted that the City is asking for the plats and we are acquiring the land.

2.27 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of the Replat of Lot 1, Block 1, Columbia Park 24th Addn. (loc. east of Columbia Road and south of 36th Ave.S.)_____________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.28 Request from HHD, Inc. for preliminary approval of the Plat of Perkins 12th Resubdiv. (loc. on Balsam Circle, east of S. 34th St. and south of 36th Ave.S.)
There were no comments.

2.29 Request from HHD, Inc. for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the zoning map and exclude from Perkins Third PUD (Planned Unit Development), Concept Development Plan, Amendment No. 3, and to include within Perkins Third PUD (Planned Unit Development), Concept Development Plan, Amendment No. 4, all of Perkins 3rd, 4th and 5th Addns. and all of Perkins 6th through 12th Resubdiv. (loc. in NE Quarter of Section 20, T151N, R50W of the 5th P.M.)________________
There were no comments.

2.30 Request from Mark Syverson for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend zoning map by amending the restrictive covenant established by Ordinance No. 2823 as it relates to the maximum number of dwelling units permitted to be constructed upon Lot 1, Block 1, Auditor's Subdiv. No. 22, said lot is zoned R-4 (Multiple Family Residence, High Density) (loc. in approx. 4000 block of 13th Ave.N.)____________________________________________________________
Brookes stated the location of this property is behind the Amoco on Gateway or to the
west of that, and behind motel on Gateway, this areas has a history and has been involved
and received phone calls over the years - this property is rather locked in, N. 39th Street and 13th Ave. and Stanford Road, and no entry and exit from north, south, east and west, and North 39th Street is a high density area, starting with Gallery Apts. and has multiple dwelling down 39th Street, and has received phone calls that address specifically the congestion on N. 39th due to high density units, problem getting up and down 39th because of parking issues, and when have street cleaning, people have to get their cars off the street and there is no place for them to move their cars, and in winter real problem. He stated another concern is that Planning Department recommends denial of this, and are saying that things haven't changed since 1986 and was zoned R-4 and issues are parking issues and issue of school - Lake Agassiz, is 2 or 3 blocks away and now has 6 relocatables, increase in enrollment at the University and projected additional increase puts more pressure on that school, and key issues in that area are of entry and exit and problems that are going to exist there, vehicle issues, snow removal and street cleaning, etc. going to be a real problem, was zoned for up to a 16-plex by restricted covenant for that parcel and reasons haven't changed; and can't see changing that to a 32-plex, - neighborhood knows that this property will be developed with something but zoning there was put in for a reason and changing that at this time, sees no justification for it. He asked Mr. Swanson as zoning established with restrictive covenants and if this is a change in an ordinance.

Howard Swanson, city attorney, stated the change in zoning will encompass an ordinance, however, the factor here is the covenant, and in his discussions with the Planning Department advised them that if there were a change it would require two steps which would be done simultaneously and that would be the amendment of the ordinance and a recording of an amendment to the restrictive use or covenant with the recorder's office. Brooks stated if a change in an ordinance is determined by the number of votes to pass, majority or 5. Mr. Swanson stated it would be considered an amendment to the zoning map because it modifies permitted uses within that district and requires 3/4 vote of the members of the council to approve that change.

Mr. Swanson stated the ordinance that was passed included the restriction of the number of units in the ordinance, therefore, you do have to amend the zoning ordinance, and in addition that was recorded as a restrictive covenant, so a two-step process, unusual in that it is not the normal situation for your zoning code.

Hamerlik stated the packet includes the August 17, 1987 minutes of the council, a former council person called him and indicated that specific item but said at that time that was discussed and a negotiated out item, it wasn't unanimous and that is how they arrived at 16, that it was not a quick decision and was something that they settled satisfying both parties and negotiated to that level, so to change that maybe go against the intent of those people at that time.
Kevin Jacobson, 1018 Shakespeare Road, stated as a resident in the lowest lying property on the block, he has had two events of basement flooding, 2002 and 2003 by what the engineers claim was an act of God, rain of 6 inches in 2 hours, and storm sewer was never designed for that and his concern is allowing property of this magnitude being built and there is going to be twice the amount of garage space, twice amount of parking space, which in turn is twice the amount of run-off into a storm sewer that can no longer compete with what is existing at this time, is of great concern that the drainage is not adequate at this point, let along putting more water into the storm sewer.

Kerian stated that this property has been sitting there for 20 years and would appear that it is not economically viable and not the reason to make this change, but going to hear some other factors and that was one of the concerns that she had was to have a prime piece of property in the community where there are services there that could be for good use in the community.

Kreun stated at Planning meeting that Mr. Syverson brought forth a fairly good rendition of what he was going to put in there and the suggestion to him was to take the names of the residents in that area provided by Planning so he could contact them to show them what he would be building there, whether 16 or 32-plex, two of the people who sit on the Planning Commission have residences in that particular area and they thought it was worth looking at, and would have hoped that Mr. Syverson would have been able to contact people and made a presentation so could understand what trying to accomplish because it does look like a fairly nice addition to the area He stated regarding the drainage problem in those areas where there is a higher density at this point in time you have a holding pond on the property to hold that water, but could be developed whether 16 or 32-plex into that area so hold the water, and was hoping Mr. Syverson could have met with the neighborhood to see if there was something that could be worked out before it gets to this point and perhaps contact him again and have him do that to see what would be applicable or acceptable to him and the neighborhood because property has been sitting there for quite a while and concerned that we better take the best use because it may come to the point where something would be put there that may not be applicable and forced into it; and contact Mr. Syverson to see if he would meet with the neighborhood to see if something could be worked out ahead of time.

Gershman stated his concern is that even though they are requested to give preliminary approval next Monday, unless this is time sensitive doesn't know that is enough time for neighborhood to meet with Mr. Syverson and to come back for vote next week, and might want to consider tabling this as thinks the neighbors need some time to meet and doesn't want to give preliminary approval.

Brooks stated in the last year or two had major rain event and spent some time on 13th Avenue between Shakespeare and Darwin, that between those streets is an old creek bed and drainage system and set up to drain going north towards Gateway, and now water from the area was pouring into the backyards between houses on Shakespeare and got very close and spent some time there with street department, and we are going to have to look at that because now it won't drain and if put in buildings and concrete it will multiply the problem more, and need to stay with what was set up in 1986.

Christensen stated he doesn't see what has changed from 1987 until now, and developer should be talking to these people to see what their concerns are, and would like to see what the developer has planned, how he wants to lay the building out and concern with drainage, and no chance this should be approved if it drains towards Shakespeare, and if this property would be approved, then condition would be that whatever they do they have to have a drain field that moves to the north, that knew what the restrictions were.

Hamerlik stated he would like to know if there was a plan 4 to 5 years ago for developing that area and for a road to go north from 13th Avenue to Gateway Drive and if not, when was it changed. Mr. Potter stated their initial research did not show any platted right of way going from the area of this property north to the frontage road that runs east/west on the south side of Gateway and let them go back and double check that to be absolutely sure and have that answer a week from today.

Glassheim stated he wanted to make very sure that whoever is developing this now would have been able to see on a legal document that the 16-units are what's required, and nobody was misled.

2.31 Request from Paces Lodging Corp. for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the zoning map to rezone and exclude from the A-2 (Agricultural Reserve) Dist. a portion of Lot 1 Block 1, Curran's Second Subdiv. and to exclude from the B-3 (General Business) Dist. all of Stadter Second Resubdiv. and to include within the Stadter Center PUD (Planned Unit Development), Concept Development Plan a portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Curran's Second Subdiv. and all of Stadter Second Resubdiv. (loc. west of S. Washington Street between 44th and 47th Aves.S.)_____
It was noted the vote by Planning Commission was unanimous.

2.32 Downtown Development Proposals.
Glassheim stated he wanted to record his minority concern for Site #3 in terms of fitting
in with the neighborhood, the density of the neighborhood and the style and design of the neighborhood; the other proposal was 6 tenths of a point in the advisory committee and that the Schoen & Assoc. proposal is gorgeous but it looks like it belongs in the center of downtown and not on the outskirts, and the Dakota/Crary proposal looked like the blocks surrounding the North 4th Street site.

Gershman stated he was on the opposite side, both projects looked very good and the Dakota/ Crary project architecturally is very nice but reminded you that on N. 3rd Street there is also an apartment building that is brick and is tying in somewhat kitty-corner from the Eastgate Apts. so fabric of the architecture is continued with the Schoen project and doesn't find that to be offensive to him and also the number of units was greater which means more people living downtown and that is one of the reasons supported it, was a close vote because of the architectural strength of both projects.

Kerian stated there was some additional information put together about the cost of the projects and what City input into that would be and kind of money it is and if that information is available would help her for next Monday's discussion. Mayor Brown asked Urban Development to take care of that request.

Christensen stated they had that information available and was one of the items they discussed at the Finance Comm. as to why they went with the Selection Comm.'s selection of the Schoen & Assoc. at Site #3, primarily because there was very little utilization of City funds; that none of these projects really utilized a lot of CDBG funds; and asked for further edification as to Site #2 and Site #4 because those two sites, one deals with a change of direction on the lot across from the Dacotah Hotel and the other deals with the construction of townhomes that would be to the north of the KC Hall, and asked what they had come up with the Site #4 location which would be construction of apartments on that parking lot.

Keith Lund, Urban Development, stated Site #2 is parking lot across from the Ryan Hotel and have had two phone calls with MetroPlains, the developer, on that project and have changed the focus on that project from condominiums to apartment units and asked them for elevation drawings and have asked each developer to prepare a proforma of the project without City assistance so can identify if a gap exists and then determine what level City participation is required to make the project work, and anticipate hearing from them this week on that project. Christensen asked what response have they received from the city attorney regarding the RFP. Mr. Swanson stated as he understands the situation for that particular location, you received one proposal according to an RFP that was published by the City, there is very little case law relating to RFP's for construction of publicly owned property and is not a common occurrence, and is not able to give you a very definitive answer, however, in referring to bidding law which there are far more cases reported and are dealing with specific specifications, the general rule of law is where you have received only one response to a request for bids, the City is entitled to enter into negotiations or discussions with that bidder, the predominant test is whether or not there is a material change in the scope of those bid specifications so as to provide a competitive advantage over somebody else that didn't put in a bid, in this case because there were no specifications and was an RFP left to the proposer to determine what scope they wished to have considered by the City, doesn't find that you have an inherent risk in moving forward. If on the other hand, you think that it is of such a change in the scope that you want to have an opportunity to back out, that would also be within your discretion.

Christensen encouraged staff's to continue negotiations with that group and get it to them asap so if they choose to construct apartments in that area with that group, can move forward with that because good enhancement to the community to have some rental units as in a combination with the Schoen project which will be owner occupied and bring more people downtown.

Hamerlik stated there were 4 sites and committee recommended 2 from the Finance/Dev. Comm. the same as the selection committee, and the other 2 were deferred and will be coming up later and the other 2 that have not been recommended at this time, further negotiations are taking place.

Kreun suggested that they follow up as quickly as possible because one of the things that they haven't accomplished with this RFP is putting greater numbers downtown in order to off-set some of the businesses we would like to see so they can survive, with the proposal of some apartments that are coming up, does put those numbers downtown in larger amounts so that whether rental or purchase, that they have put a lot of money in the downtown for businesses and now put some money in the housing area so that the two compliment each other, and would encourage you to continue.

Mr. Swanson stated that you will note discussion in the staff report about an opinion that he did about the issue earlier on the conveyance of the property, and need to make sure that that ordinance has received final approval if you decide to adopt that ordinance before you give final approval to any of these proposals.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Portfolio Management/Summary report as of May 31, 2005
Informational item - no comments.

4. CITIZEN REQUEST
There were no requests.

5. ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR COMMENTS
There were no comments.

6. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Hamerlik wished Sacred Heart good luck as they are in the state tournament for the first time, next Thursday, so good luck Eagles.

2) Mr. Swanson stated as a result of a decision made last week the briefing schedule for the landfill in front of the Turtle River Township has been extended again until June 24, 2005 and would anticipate that sometime after June 24 the Township will begin to consider that matter.

3) Mr. Swanson stated that he handed out a memo that he thought contained the revised ordinance with respect to smoking in public places and places of employment, and found that the ordinance is an old draft and tomorrow will send out by e-mail and hard copy a cross/hatched and underlined version to see specifically the changes that were incorporated from what was introduced preliminarily and what was amended last week.

4) Gershman stated that on Friday night he and Council Member Glassheim had the privilege of entertaining the president of the National Aviation University from the Ukraine who was here meeting with Center for Aerospace; he was wonderfully entertaining gentlemen; that they are celebrating their 75th year and presented their 75th coin to the City. He stated the university has 35,000 students of which 5,000 are actually flying and they have quite a history of aviation in the Ukraine where a lot of Mig jets are made and are connecting with UND Aerospace. This contact came through George Schlossberg, who is our consultant for our BRAC committee and who has been doing a lot of work in the Ukraine and they came over to meet with Senator Dorgan and came out here last week. He stated he and Mr. Glassheim had a great time and presented to Mayor Brown the coin, a ceramic plat commemorating their 75th anniversary and also all the beautiful churches in Kiev, and aCD.

He stated that the ArtFest was terrific and congratulated everybody that was involved in that.

4) Council Member Christensen stated he had info. on his desk re. public input meeting for reconstruction of 47th Avenue South from South Washington to Belmont Road that says "this proposed project is to be funded with federal funds and special assessments to the benefiting property owners" and it occurs to him that 47th Avenue is a major arterial and that they have been talking about developing a source of funding without special assessments on major arterials. He stated that this would be an opportunity for staff and others to put their heads together, knows we have a tight budget this year with mill decrease, but would like to think about not having very many special assessments for an arterial like this, and learned our lesson on 42nd; and asked if we have defined the special assessment district yet. Mr. Grasser stated they created that district a couple months ago, protest period won't be completed until the bids are received a year from now. Christensen stated we should think about the district and who would be affected in the district and if shift gears or maybe can't shift gear completely because that is a spendy road, about a mile, and a lot of money involved on this project. Mr. Grasser stated that is why they are bringing federal dollars into this project to help off-set that, and this project goes from Cherry to Washington and one of the reasons it doesn't go to Belmont is because we ran out of federal funds.

7. ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Brooks that we adjourn. Carried 7 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor