Council Minutes

Minutes/Committee of the Whole
Monday, October 10, 2005 - 7:00 p.m.

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, October 10, 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, Glassheim (teleconference), Gershman, Christensen, Kerian (teleconference), 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:
He stated this past Sunday he participated in the 4th Annual Buddy Walk and walked with Charlie and his parents Tim and Brenda, and theme this year was inclusion and how important inclusion is to people with disabilities.
This is Fire Prevention Week and encouraged everyone to check their smoke detector batteries and exit plans for your families.
Leaf pickup begins next week, weather permitting, and hope to make 2 full passes through the city and expect that to take about 3 to 4 weeks. Any questions please call 746-Info.

INFORMATION RE. VACANCIES OR UPCOMING VACANCIES

Mayor Brown reported that information was in council member packets and more information is available on the website and announced some of the board and committee openings that are presently available: 2 openings on the Downtown Design Review Board; 2 openings on the Event Center Commission; 3 on the Planning and Zoning Commission, one of which is a council member; 2 on the Public Library Board; 2 on Civil Service Commission, labor and HR backgrounds are required; 1 on the Special Assessment Commission; and 2 on the Growth Fund. He stated if anyone has questions to please contact website or call the mayor's office for more information on committee openings.

2.1 Turtle Mountain gaming resolution.
Mayor Brown stated it is important for the community to have a discussion on this
subject, that this is a positive move and is beneficial to the tribe and our community, that the Alerus and Engelstad Arena have changed the face of Grand Forks and that this is another opportunity to strengthen and diversify our economy and community - needs discussion so if any down sides they can be mitigated but an opportunity that we should look at thoughtfully and continue discussion and dialogue; opportunity that can be very worthwhile if dealt with in the right way. Mayor Brown welcomed and recognized Chairman Davis.

Council Member Hamerlik reported they have had some materials in form of resolutions and that they have in their packet the information item which was submitted by the mayor and should be working off one resolution - difficult if going over several resolutions at one time and suggested reviewing the resolution in the packet.

Council Member Glassheim stated he had distributed to the council amendment he hoped to propose next week, substitute for the one in the packet (council members had not received the e-mail from Mr. Glassheim). He stated he would be proposing to the council next week to discourage bringing casino to Grand Forks and listing various reason: low paying and low skilled jobs, etc., lead to an increase in public spending of public safety and social services, will demoralize Grand Forks economy, move money out of normal retail channels into gambling, create problem gamblers; and that the council encourage the Band of Chippewa Indians to explore other investment opportunities.

Council Member Hamerlik stated that next Monday we will not be voting on whether a casino comes here or not, what we are discussing is should we pass a resolution to listen to and see what the Tribe has to offer, and should be focusing on the resolution(s) and sometime down the road discuss what offer was or if there is an offer.

Council Member Brooks stated we are all concerned about moral fiber, etc., it would bring some economics to us and looks favorably on that. He noted that the City is in the business of entertainment in the Alerus and is concerned about entertainment venue; another concern is that if this goes forward will enter into a business relationship and concerned about the business partner we are getting into - know Mr. Davis for number of years and is excellent thing doing for the Chippewa Band in bringing this in for economic growth but when he sees some of the members of the tribe are trying to recall Mr. Davis, and says that is a concern.

Council Member Gershman stated that we want to continue this discussion, find out answers to some of our problems but want to take the time so the community can have a serious dialogue about this, not right to say yes or no at this point, feelings run very strong on both sides of this issue and needs to understand the issues better, need to take time and continue discussion.

Debbie Jungels, 907 South 20th Street, stated she is really concerned and have been to churches and people are concerned about gambling coming to Grand Forks, they feel there are enough gambling casinos around so that anybody that wants to gamble can easily go there. She stated she feels that we don't need gambling in Grand Forks, doesn't think there would be any economic value because of the things that would happen to us through gambling, that we already know we have meth problems in Grand Forks, drug problems and why do we want to bring another problem into Grand Forks.

Council Member Kreun asked Chairman Davis why resolution needed, and approximately how long does the process take if it were to take place; and wants to continue to look at this process, business aspect.

Chairman Davis congratulated them on their resolution with the sister city in Norway and things said things you said the intent there was to promote tourism, good economic relationship is similar to what they have come here to talk and territory that was their aboriginal lands that they had taken from them and feel under the gaming act allow some opportunity to come back and do commerce in their aboriginal ancestral lands, trying to come here on behalf of his Tribe, a very poor tribe, to take advantage of an economic opportunity that is authorized under Federal Law to see if they would be welcome in the city to do business.
He stated since last year they have been trying to address some of the concerns the City had at that time and some of the concerns they have, they have had two community meetings, had dialogue with the City officials and been persistent in exploring what this opportunity may have for them, they met with the Governor and are continuing under Section 2719 of the Gaming Act, it requires them to do a two-part determination and first major step is to make sure that the City off reservation that they want to approach is welcoming and supporting them in this possible venture, they think gaming is a major entertainment industry today, major tourism industry and it isn't going to rely exclusively on the citizens of Grand Forks, bring you into an industry that is
going to bring people here, how long is it going to take - no fixed time table, the two-part determination has been done only a few places since the 1988 Gaming Act and very difficult process, go through meetings, of trying to bring the land into trust, environmental analysis, go through financing, construction and other arrangements that are necessary, compact with the State, Governor, and when started said the process would take 2 to 3 years.
He stated he took office a year ago and his Tribe has some members that are concerned about recalling him but his Tribe is not recalling him except some members that he has some opposition in. A lot of the questions will get answered, the charitables are concern of theirs, native people have a very great custom of sharing and feel very strongly that the gaming industries tht you see around this country contribute immensely back to the communities, counties, cities, states that they are in, not only economically but some of the greatest supporters of charitable ventures are Indian gaming enterprises.
He also stated they have every intent of securing the necessary financing to bring a state of the art entertaining gaming facility to Grand Forks and have engaged in the preliminary architectural work on that and discussing to the extent that they have to go forward in the size of the facility that can be supported.

Council Member Christensen stated that he had attended the August 17, 2005 meeting and that there were a lot of concerns raised by members of the council, and at that meeting it was suggested that the council attempt to draft something that would summarize our thoughts and concerns that are set forth in the minutes, they did that and he drafted this resolution, submitted it to the administration and resolution came forward under the signature of Mr. Duquette on behalf of the mayor.
He stated for the record, and thinks this is the best he can do as a member of the council at this time is listening to the Tribe but thinks it would be irresponsible for us to embrace something we know nothing about and irresponsible to suggest that they would lead you down the path of accepting a gift or sale of 40 acres with another 40 acres so they would be control in the Tribe of 40 to 80 acres of trust land in this community until they had absolutely 100 percent full understanding of what that meant. He stated until such time as they are prepared to spend some money to engage their own counsel to assist us in understanding what we are getting into, the best they can do as a council is listen, but assuming this comes before us when he is still here, he could never support 80 acres and tough time supporting 40 acres and will be very concerned as to the impact this proposal will have on the Alerus because we have a substantial investment of community funds and money and just engaging in a contract with gentlemen from Canada who are prepared to go forward and spends $35 to $45 million on their entertainment facility
He also stated he is not sure council has the right to make a decision that perhaps deserves a community wide input in the form of a referendum. He stated the resolution he drafted is the resolution he can support and not to say they have decided what they are going to do, thinks we should listen and then begin drawing some conclusions as to what we could support and engage in that community dialogue as the mayor has said.

Chairman Davis stated that when they met with the council on November 6 last year, they were advised by council of a process to follow, they followed that process and waited through the spring and most of the summer for response back from the council and were told that once they went through those steps that the council would debate the issues and information and make some gesture of support the council is willing to give, and when they didn't get that, they drafted a resolution and sent it over for discussion and made some alterations to it and agrees with Council Member Christensen that there are a lot of parts to this venture that still have to be resolved, the 40 acres, the additional 40 acres, that they have never said that they were going to have a set plan to take an additional 40 acres into trust, when they talk about the additional 40 acres they may find that they have a different need, not a gaming need, to take land and use it for other commercial development, when they talk about what this project is going to do to pay for infrastructure support, whether water, streets, and understand that they are not going to be asking the City or County to give that free of charge, that there are things that they are to sit down and negotiate and discuss with the council - sales tax, and expect that they are going to have to come to resolution, when they first approached you they wanted this project to be mutually beneficial to your community and to theirs and still feel very strongly that they have to definitely show those advantages and all of the specifics, and as go forward all of that would enfold.

Mayor Brown stated he thinks it is normal that people are apprehensive about change and ironic that the same arguments that were used against charitable gaming are now being used against this opportunity, and important to have the dialogue, keep open minds, see what the benefits are, mitigate if down side and encourage the council to continue the dialogue.

Council Member Kreun commended Chairman Davis, that he inherited this project and when we were there for that meeting , all of these items were discussed and brought forth, this will be upfront, discussed and brought forward; has to be beneficial to both communities and were told it would develop employment and a viable business venture, still have lot of discussion, maybe won't work for both of us but we would be remiss if we didn't take a look at all the options that are brought before us.

Council Member Christensen suggested we be better informed as to what we could expect legally if we entered into an agreement with sovereign nation dealing with trust land as to what we can expect and what we can negotiate, we don't know what we can or can't do and have to understand how we can tell our citizens that if we feel as a council this is a good deal, we can sell it and need to be better informed and encourage you to begin the information process.

Council Member Gershman stated he has had people say that we should not be entertaining this because of the issue with the logo, and wants to make some things clear to the public, that Chippewa Band, Chairman Davis, sent a letter of support of the logo and that is their position, but his position is that it will not influence him one way or the other, that logo issue is separate and will not stand for it to be on this table.

Council Member Glassheim stated he thinks gaming will hurt the city, but if the council is interested at all in entertaining, should we start expending our own money for legal and other research rather than depend upon the Tribe to give us information and we should be asking the questions that concern us and should go ahead with investigation, legal and other ramifications and ought to think about if we are serious scheduling an advisory vote of the public.

2.2 Issuance of Revenue Bonds on behalf of Altru Health Systems, call a public hearing_________________________________________________________
The city auditor reported there was a revised resolution on their desks that more clearly
defines the uses of those funds; and that these bonds are not a liability of the City of Grand Forks, there is authorization under State Statute for this type of organization to issue Municipal Industrial Development Bonds and are totally their liability, we do not record it on our books. Council Member Hamerlik noted that this is not the first time we have done this for Altru Hospital.

2.3 Issuance of $3,725,000 Temporary Improvement Warrants, Series 2005D, call for bids for November 7, 2005______________________________________________
There were no comments. The city auditor stated the intention on this is really to hold off
for the final assessment until we have all the final project costs, and is anticipating that assessment will not occur until the fall of 2007 with the payable in 2008.

2.4 Streamlined Sales Tax required City Code changes.
Mr. Swanson reported that the ordinance the council members have is a draft and there
are a couple modifications that need to be made, the draft incorrectly attempts to repeal a
3/4% and should be the 1/4% that is repealed under sales tax and is readopted under Hotel/Motel
Food and Beverage Tax, and has included a memorandum from the Tax Commissioner's Office
that gives background as to why these changes are necessary, and will be distributing the revised
draft before Monday.

Council Member Hamerlik asked if they can be assured that this does not in anyway have any
impact on sales tax for the Alerus. Mr. Swanson stated he included the Tax Commissioner's
memo in the packet and that restates the legislation that was adopted this last year that in effect
renders portions of our sales tax ordinance void. He stated the only authority that he can find that
would allow us to re-impose the same tax on the same sales transactions is as a Hotel/Motel Food
and Beverage Tax, the identical transactions are being taxed under the draft ordinance as is
presently in effect. That it will no longer be called a sales tax but Hotel/Motel Food and
Beverage Tax, the dollar amounts should be identical as to the taxes collected and paid to the
Alerus for the activities.

Mr. Swanson stated they have had a series of on-going communications with the Tax
Commissioner's Office and does not have writing back from them specifically with respect to this
draft, they are aware of the authority and in part the authority was recommended by them, and is
comfortable that we have the authority under the existing state statutes to impose this 1/4% tax.
- there will a different reporting requirement for those businesses that are affected.

2.5 Ordinance amending Section 24-0104 of the Grand Forks City Code relating to powers and duties of the Jobs Development Authority._________________
Council Member Brooks stated under hiring personnel and staff in the ordinance asked if
talking about the committee itself, concerns because of provision that says to sue and be sued, and if that is elected officials that do the hiring. Mr. Swanson stated that is an Authority established specifically under State Statute to hire personnel and staff, that would be an Authority or power that would be executed by the JDA in that capacity, is in your existing Code and not recommending any changes to that. Presently the JDA does not have any staff or personnel however the authority is there if the JDA wanted to entertain that option, they have it; that the changes he is proposing are inherent or implicit in what the authority of the JDA has been exercising in the past and is to enter into leases where you maybe leasing equipment or property or entering into leasing in which you are the owner of property or equipment and leasing to another; also the specific authorization for borrowing funds or entering into debt; he was surprised in reading our draft as well as State Statue for that matter that what is implicit is not expressly stated and have included that. He stated he forwarded information of that nature to the Attorney General for the suggestion that perhaps that should be looked at for the next legislative session. He stated this is being adopted under the Home Rule Authority; noted that JDA does not levy a tax, there is a provision in the Century Code that JDA could if it choose to.

2.6 Appeals and certification of special assessments on various projects. (public hearing scheduled for October 17, 2005)____________________________________________
Council Member Hamerlik asked if it is customary for us to pass judgment on the special assessment district when it is under the control of the Park District, that he had called engineering with questions on University Park, which is completed, and that the Park District is paying for it - there were some concerns that lighting brings more traffic and more difficult situation that residents not happy with now. Cindy Voigt, asst city engineer, reported that the Park District asked the City to complete the plans and specs. and special assess it because we have staff, etc. so that they could save money for the city in general by having us do the plans for them - project is paid 100% by the Park District. Council Member Hamerlik stated the complaint he received is that the homeowners didn't want to pay any more and was under the assumption that it was already taken care of. Ms. Voigt stated wouldn't go to the adjacent residents, assessed only to Park District property.

Council Member Gershman stated he had questions on the Corporate Center parking ramp, that it appears that there are very few parking places available on the ground level, most of the spaces for the public are on the top floor, and need to look at that for some equity; and if businesses are going to be assessed for the parking ramp, should be more accessible for customers; and asked if the Corporate Center tenants assessed for Central High School ramp.

He questioned the special assessment district only seems to go north and not south, that County building has their own ramp, but other businesses and properties that would get some benefit if the same argument were made as made about the north. He stated that the Corporate Center tenants pay the bulk of it but then goes out in rings and what properties within those rings pay as it goes farther away from the Corporate Center, that we just went through an exercise where we analyzed and adjusted all of the fees and permits in this community and some hadn't been changed for 12 - 14 years and that the tenants at the Corporate Center and those who rent spaces pay $25/month and probably 5 to 6 years old and not been adjusted and would like to know what parking goes for in other communities around the area, but should be adjusted also, which might alleviate some of the special assessments for the people on the outer rings of the parking district.

The city auditor reported the district was a carbon copy of the district established for the Central High School parking ramp and ran to the RR tracks, that when originally doing the downtown area the County was not going to build their own ramp but actually drafting a district map for south of the tracks to put in that ramp; the tracks became the divider and the council established that, the Corporate Center pays 16 times benefit compared to others, and as rings go out 4, 3 and 1 and farther out you get, get a one time benefit, come in 3 times benefit, etc. and Corporate Center paid a large amount of that, and when this was established, there was a lump sum payment for the Corporate Center from the City, the project was $1.2 million and City put in $500,000 and then JDA has paid the first 5 years of that assessment to bring it down; the parking is handled by Urban Development Office and can look at the fees.

Keith Lund, Urban Development, reported that there are 32 parking spaces that are timed 2-hour parking, doesn't have a count on the first floor but the majority of those are the first floor for the turn-over traffic for the retail establishments of the downtown - there are 54 Corporate Center customer spaces, and will get information of where 32 spaces are.

The city auditor reported that the property owners downtown have received their notices and have heard from several of them, and at the special assessment commission hearing 7 came in.

Dan Sampson, 100 North 3rd Street, protested the assessments for his properties, paid for one ramp and now charging for second ramp, doesn't seem fair, that the Special Assessment Commission said they could not change the boundaries but had to be changed by the council, that the ramp is used by the Corporate Center and should be paid for by the Corporate Center. He also noted that nobody at the Dacotah uses the ramp.

Council Member Christensen asked if the council could readjust the special assessment district at this time. Mr. Swanson stated he had not had an opportunity to look at the history of when that district was created, that in the process where you are approving the assessments, the district has already been set and don't have the authority to alter the boundaries of the district, nor do you have the authority to alter the total amount of the assessment levied across the district, but can make adjustments within the district by increasing some and decreasing others, the assessments have to balance so the authority of the council once you have started a special assessment process, is fairly limited.

Council Member Christensen stated there appears to be obvious inequities in the payment for a parking ramp, stated that they used some CDBG funds to frontload this process 5 years ago, that we have money available and perhaps think about using some of our CDBG funds to assist a struggling area in our downtown; that the city auditor had mentioned CDBG funds and if want to broaden wider if intention is to help that area because of potential for economic development, and we can look at other sources. The city auditor stated they would send out listing of properties and assessments.

Mr. Lund stated that the Corporate Center, 4.1 and 4.2 buildings, have a combined payment of $147,000 to date and the amount that has been billed back to them, the tenants of the Corporate Center have yet to pay and will pay $412,000 for the next 15 years until the assessment is paid off, a total of $559,000 will be billed and paid by the tenants of the Corporate Center assuming the buildings are occupied.

2.7 Create special assessment district for Project No. 5534, Dist. No. 288, watermain for
2400 block of South 42nd Street.___________________________________________
A revised map was distributed to council. No comments.

2.8 Bids for construction of Project No. 5627.2, 17th Avenue South and English Coulee flashing beacon._________________________________________________________
Council Member Brooks noted there was only one bid received and was 63% over the
engineer's estimate, and if there were concerns. Ms. Voigt reported she called the contractor and that they worked on this change order, had to do with the materials and the misunderstanding of bidding different types of pole steel and that was a major increase that they weren't expecting.

Council Member Hamerlik asked if they can adjust something later, if it is possible that some didn't bid because of the way it was spec'd and is it legal to adjust what the one bid or renegotiate or should there be a completely new bidding process. Mr. Swanson stated the test is whether or not there is a material change in the scope of the project that is being bid, if you determine that a change order will in effect create a material change, your obligation is to rebid it and if you find that change order does not result in material change in the scope of the project, there is no need to rebid it. Council Member Hamerlik suggested if we are 63% over there must be a substantial change. Ms. Voigt stated there was not a substantial change on how the spec was read, everyone could have bid per the spec. as the contractor did, doesn't understand why others didn't submit a bid, but it wasn't because the spec was wrong and wouldn't recommend that they rebid it expecting to get a better price.

2.9 Bid specifications for fire department command vehicle.
No comments.

2.10 Bids for Grand Forks Regional EOD Team.
(Explosive ordinance disposal) - No comments.
2.11 Amendment No. 2 to agreement for engineering services for Project No. 4769, Raw Water Intake and Transmission Lines._____________________________________
No comments.

2.12 Sanitation Department brush and tree debris chipping bid.
No comments.

2.13 Request for funding by Community Violence Intervention Center (CVIC)
Request withdrawn.

2.14 Request from Steve Adams on behalf of Art Greenberg for approval of the Replat of Lot 1, Block 2, Columbia Park 22nd Addn. (loc. in 3500 block of S. 42nd St.) and preliminary approval of ordinance amending Street and Highway Plan___________
There were no comments.

2.15 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Road Runner Two, LLC for final approval of Replat of Lots 11 and 12, Block 9, Westacott's Subdivision (located at 1734 12th Ave.N.)_______________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.16 Request from Greg Opp on behalf of Roadrunner Investment, LLC for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend zoning map to include within B-3 (General Business) Dist the easterly 40 ft. of Lot 11, Block 9, Westacott's Sub-division (loc at 1734 12th Ave.N.)_______________________________________
There were no comments.

2.17 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Southern Estates LLP for preliminary approval of plat of Southern Estates Fifth Addn. (located west of S. 20th St. between the Southend Drainway and 43rd Ave.S. and to include variance to the subdivision regulations Sec. 18-0907 (2)(1) relating to rights of way width for local streets _
There were no comments.

2.18 Request from Planning Department for preliminary approval of ordinance amending Sections 18-0301 and 18-0410 of the Grand Forks City Code relating to Signs and Non-Conforming Signs.________________________________________
Council Member Hamerlik asked what the timeline is for the ordinance and if it goes back to Planning and Zoning, etc. Dennis Potter, city planner, stated if ordinance is given preliminary approval next Monday, it will go back to Planning and Zoning and they will hold a public hearing on November 2 and it would come back to council on November 14 for committee of the whole and then to city council on November 21.

Mr. Swanson stated this is a preliminary draft, the Planning and Zoning Commission can make changes and council can make changes, the Planning and Zoning Commission has to hold a public hearing but it is up to council to give final approval or adoption.

2.19 Appointment to MPO Executive Policy Committee.
There were no comments.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Portfolio Management/Portfolio Summary as of September 30, 2005.
Informational item - no comments.

6. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Brooks encouraged people if interested in participating and getting involved in committees with openings to let mayor's office know; would like to see people step forward.

2) Council Member Hamerlik stated that several weeks ago they tabled the Neighborhood Concerns Committee for one month and were going to do some staff work on it, suggested that perhaps they could place a moratorium on permits. It was noted this item would be on the agenda for the October 17 council meeting.

ADJOURN

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

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor