Council Minutes

Minutes of the Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the Whole
Monday, June 26, 2006 - 7:00 p.m._________________________

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, June 26, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers in City Hall with President Gershman presiding. Present at roll call were: Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Kerian, Kreun - 7; absent: none.

President Gershman 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.

2.1 Application for exemption of remodeling improvements to commercial and residential buildings at various locations______________________________
There were no comments.

2.2 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6023, Dist. No. 451, sanitary sewer for Columbia Park 32nd Addn.___________________
2.3 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6024, Dist. No. 294, watermain for Columbia Park 32nd Addn._______________________
2.4 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6025, Dist. No. 452, storm sewer for Columbia Park 32nd Addn.________________________________
2.5 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6026, Dist. No. 626, paving Columbia Park 32nd Addn__________________________________________
2.6 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6033, Dist. No. 628, paving S. 38th St. (36th Ave.S. to Southend Drainway)__________________________
The items 2.2 through 2.6 were pulled from the agenda.
Mr. Grasser reported the reason these items are being removed from the agenda is
that the developer filed a letter asking to stop proceeding on those projects. Council Member Kreun asked that they consider working on this over the winter months with design stage and direct staff to continue because that area is going to be developed in the very near future.

Council Member Kerian asked where the park will be located in relation to all of this. Mr. Grasser stated the area dedicated to the park is the area on the southside of Ruemmele Road, and part of the large lot on the east side. Council Member Kerian asked if someone is working on road design with Park District; Mr. Grasser stated they have had some discussion about the roads coming through the park but haven't come to resolution on those as yet.

Council Member Christensen stated this highlights the issue of park and open space in that area of town rather than buying it out, that it is 40 acres and would be a good opportunity to get design of it for future development in this area of town. Mr. Grasser stated the Park District has done some master planning in here looking at different alternative layouts for different types of facilities that they might consider. Mr. Christensen stated when looking at our statutes and the 8% ordinance, the money is supposed to be used for parks within the subdivision, and maybe we have to address that if we still want to deal with the 8% ordinance and start talking about areas of town, and move those monies towards there and have a collective effort for the development of that.

2.7 Bids for Project No. 5968, Dist. No. 291, watermain on 40th Ave.S. (S. Washington St. to S. 16th St.)__________________________________
There were no comments.

2.8 Lincoln Drive road improvements.
There were no comments.

2.9 Engineering Service Agreement for Project No. 5993, Grand Forks City Perimeter drainage Study_______________________________________
There were no comments.

2.10 Consideration of bids for Project No. 4648.8 Water System Improvements, Bid Package 3, Broadband Back bone Interconnect and Wireless Mobile Data System.____________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.11 Landfill update.
Todd Feland, public works director, made a brief overview of the landfill, and
one of the issues is that they have concerns at the existing landfill about running out of capacity,
and discussed final closure plan and goal with ND Dept. of Health at modifying our closure plan,
and trying to maximize our existing space at the landfill to look at raising elevation of areas to get us to October, 2008 which is the date in conversations with FAA, ND Aeronautical Commission and Airport as a drop date that we can continue to accept solid waste at our landfill, and work in July and August to modify the plan and in September of this year have a public comment period and perhaps a public hearing. That to modify the closure plan to October, 2008 is the most critical thing they are working on now.

He stated he has had conversations with 3 interim disposal options; that he sent a letter to the Mar-Kit Landfill or the Marshall Kittson landfill which is in Hallock, Mn and has not received official word but told verbally that their Board reviewed our request and that the answer is no, mainly because they are a smaller landfill, and they are looking at accepting some of the surrounding Mn communities' solid waste and has taken that off the map right now and is focused on Fargo and Waste Management Landfills and with Gwinner landfill which is about 160 miles south and west of Grand Forks. He stated he has talked with the City of Fargo and they would consider accepting the City's solid waste and would like to see the City continue to work with them and at a long term solution between the two regions. He talked to Waste Management and they are interested in bidding or negotiating a contract and are down to the City of Fargo as an option or Waste Management.

He stated he looked at some general estimates and that our tipping fees could double, and has given a range and in looking at Gwinner option and Fargo option a mid point number is $60/ton which would include debt service and tapping fee. He noted we are at a tipping fee of $33.50 and if double the fee, $67/ton and be around the $60/ton when done; City does all commercial and residential pickup, and residential is $11.45 and if half is disposal and doubles that would be $17.18, $5.73 more per month.

He stated they are working on immediate need to modify the closure plan and with conversations with the Dept. of Health they don't see any show stoppers there, but if that didn't turn out, are going to finalize the proposal so that those will be ready by this fall to go out and get bids from Waste Management or with City of Fargo, those are on parallel courses and hopefully can get plan modified so that we have another year and half of breathing room or if not, go out this fall and look at what prices are going to be and figure out what that will mean.

For a longer term we are a part of the Red River Valley Lakes Region study that has just started and suspects it will come back as the landfill alternative is the best option, and second conclusion will probably be the best site for it will be near Fargo because in the industry that is known as centroid of the solid waste and obviously Fargo, Moorhead and West Fargo are the center of the population and that is where a disposal facility would go, whether it is a landfill or an incinerator.

He stated he looked at where we are currently in the sanitation enterprise fund, and at the end of the year will have approx. $3.8 million in our landfill closure account, and to close the landfill after this year's project looking at around $3.4 million but if operate next year and into 2008 that means we can get more areas closed with the current fund balances and still have landfill revenue coming in. The whole key is to keep the landfill going as long as we can in an environmentally and suitable way. He looked at what our cash balance is projected to be and a cash balance of around $1.9 million at the end of this fiscal year based upon where the revenues are coming in and our expenditures are pretty much on what budgeted, and 25% has been our standard and when he and the city auditor looked at what the cash balances should be in, the utilities have used 25% of the O & M and that is about $1.3 million and a bit of a cash balance more than what we normally have. and over the last couple years have tried to drive up the cash balance because know that things are going to come up and that is an additional $600,000.

He stated as they go through the process have discussed options and the more you look at this issue the more they come back to the Turtle River Township site, that there is a reason why the City selected it in the late 90's, is still a good site and worthy of pushing that site to its conclusion. He stated that last week talked re. proposal in Lakeville Township which is between Gilby and Manvel, where 3 property owners are interested in exploring whether the region is interested in having a landfill, that they will meet with the Lakeville Twp. to get better sense of where they are at, and to make you aware that option is out there and will hear more at future meeting.

He stated they will be having a regional meeting with customers on Wednesday, June 28, at 2:00 p.m., sent out approx. 200 letters of invitation to county commissioners, city auditors, public works people, mayors and administrators, etc. and expect quite a few people from NE North Dakota and NW Minnesota, will do an overview of the process of how we've got to where we are today and get feedback; will have another regional meeting this fall when have more numbers and also additional follow-up informational meetings. He stated he has offered to go to individual meetings over the summer if they want him to do that.

He reviewed maps showing areas of the landfill area, baling facility, and inert landfill and areas that have been closed, and that several weeks ago they approved a 24-acre closure project; the highest point of the landfill and when talked about the E/W runway they are going to build with completion in October, 2008 that corresponds to our closure, and runway will go right across landfill; showing current area for landfill and when they get that up to closure grade and landfill road to the outskirts of the landfill, and that road will be filled in, and are modifying the closure plan so they can maximize some space and maybe get a year to two years more of capacity in solid waste closure plan.

He showed the ET (extraterritorial) map showing airport, lagoons, and wastewater treatment plant and landfill, and that these are 3 land uses we wished they hadn't put together 40-50 years ago, and area where they cannot place any landfill which is a 10,000 ft. or 2 mile rule and is in State regulations and subtitle D regulations from EPA, that Grand Forks Regional Airport is doing master planning and as a part of that doing land use planning; and areas where landfills cannot be placed because of FAA regulations. He noted area showing 4 mile ET line and to get outside of everything in this area, have to go to the southwest of Grand Forks which is a growth area for the city, land costs higher, more people and challenging area to look to. He stated when he talked about going north, next day received call from couple property owners that live in that area that don't want a landfill in their area; but he said we are looking at all options, whether hauling, put in ET area, or somewhere else in Grand Forks County, and continuing to pursue Turtle River Twp.

In summary that is where they are going and have a lot of things out there and will continue to work on it. There were no questions or comments from the council.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS

1) Council Member Brooks stated that Sunday he had privilege of speaking to group of West Point cadets who finished their helicopter training at the Aerospace, that this is the third year of that, and another group coming in two weeks; and that they liked what they saw here. He stated his other item is that they received a letter from Steve Johnson from Airport Authority and he will be sending an e-mail out re. his input on the proposal.

2) Council Member Glassheim stated he had asked about the legality of bicycle riding on the streets, whether legal or not, make more liable if hit pedestrians.

3) Council Member Kerian stated this was great experience being on the council, and staff of the city that many don't see the work that is done, that best thing to do is hire good people and let them work and that happens a lot around here, and good to work with council members. She stated there was talk about a citizen advisory committee and hopes that happens soon and that there are actual citizens on that committee; and on the property tax she noticed that the city through its legislative committee is going to get involved with the school issues at a State level and when look at property tax assistance that is the most likely way to make significant difference

4) Council Member Kreun stated he had the opportunity to visit with two groups last week, that Safeco Insurance Company in conjunction with Vaaler Insurance Agency donated a score board to Apollo Park, and only 15 agencies in the country that received that award and should give Vaaler Insurance credit and appreciates that.
He stated that last Friday he flew in one of the Strato tankers doing refueling, very interesting and Col. Bender indicated that people that do that look very young but do a good job; was impressed and wanted to make sure that we say thank you to our people in our Air Force and Air Force Base, and keep them in our thoughts and prayers.

5) President Gershman stated that Council Members Kerian and Hamerlik have much integrity, always did their homework, and had sense of decency in dealing with other council members, staff and citizens and if a disagreement, never personal; wonderful experience to get to know you better, and has tremendous respect for you and wished them both good wishes and good health.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Kerian seconded by Council Member Hamerlik that we adjourn.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor