Council Minutes

Minutes of Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the Whole
Monday, July 13, 2009 - 5:30 p.m._________________ __

The City Council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, July 13, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers in City Hall with Vice President Glassheim presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Bjerke, McNamara (teleconference), Glassheim, Gershman (teleconference), Christensen, Bakken (teleconference), Kreun - 7; absent: none.

2.1 The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of the City of Grand Forks for the period ended December 31, 2008 and the Independent Auditor's Report.___________________
The city auditor reported that the Audit Report had been sent to all council members last week and referred the report to the Audit Committee (Finance) for review at their meeting on July 22.

2.2 Application by TJ's Pool 'N Darts, 1210 S. Washington St., to update alcoholic beverage license from Class 3 (Off and or On Sale Beer/Wine) to Class 1 (General On and Off Sale Alcoholic Beverages) license._______________________________
Council Member Bjerke stated he was in disagreement with City's policy (current policy re. liquor licenses is that we allow an unlimited number and no requirements on density), and council should review; that alcohol is unique product and one of the most heavily regulated products in America, that it is a mind-altering drug, and that he will vote no as he is against expansion. He also brought up cost of trash containers downtown, etc. to try to keep cleaner, and disagrees with the current policy and should look at number and density and have that discussion.

It was reported by the city attorney that if this application is approved, it would be a smoking allowed facility, no minors allowed on premises, applicant would be required to pay an issuance fee for a Class I license as well as the additional pro-rated portion of the annual fee. City Code restricts the issuance of locations within 300 ft. of each other - front door to front door - and that restriction can be waived if the existing premise (Mexican Village) allows that. The applicant would have to provide written information to the City.

Council Member Bakken stated that the report was sent to committee with no recommendation as they had requested additional information from the police department.

Council Member McNamara stated he had brought up in the past about reviewing our policy in terms of numbers of licenses and would agree with Mr. Bjerke that we review that, that he thought the Service/Safety Committee was going to undertake that and reviewing of the overall alcohol regulations. Council Member Kreun stated that the city attorney was going to review several items for the committee, but it did not include the number of licenses issued - that it is an ordinance that would have to be changed and decided not to move that part forward.

Council Member Gershman brought up the matter of ordinance requirements that state that anybody that has or is asking for a liquor license must have all of their taxes paid to the city, including home property tax, parking assessment, etc. and if we are vigilant on that. Mr. Swanson stated that is reviewed at the time of a new application or at renewal of license, information forwarded to him comes from the finance department and police department and where they are delinquent, the licenses are either not originally issued or renewals not approved until those fees are paid. - it may be possible that there are fees that have not been identified as being delinquent but Code does require that any applicant be totally current in all of their taxes. The Code does allow you to review on a specific application whether or not the site is an appropriate site for a licensed premise, including compatibility with surrounding businesses or locations, parking, access, etc. and if there is a particular concern as to the density, etc. the Code does provide discretion to take those into consideration even though not limiting the total number of licensees or classes within particular classes.

2.3 Request to hold Frolf-A-Polooza, frisbee golf tournament in Lincoln Drive Park on August 14-16, 2009.___________________________________________________________________
Pete Haga stated this is a special event permit, that the City does have a process to assist with special events, to help organizers to realize what some of the pitfalls and challenges may be and work with administration to make sure we mitigate any sort of negative impact to the community. As a result of last week's Public Service/Safety Comm. there were several questions that resulted in some suggested conditions, that they (Mayor's Office and Info. Center) were asked to work with the organizers to address some of these conditions and suggestions, and these included changing the name, times of music and beer garden, and agreement with the City regarding overtime costs, securing proper parking, including shuttle bus, proper insurance and any other conditions or suggestions.

Sharyl Simeone, Info. Center, provided information - that Hugo Gomez is event planner for Frolf-A-Polooza and he was asked to outline his event along with details, a 2009 Frolf-A-Polooza disc golf tournament with live music for August 14-16, 2009 with a set-up date on August 13 and also an extended time on the 16th to dismantle. Information regarding the event was brought to the Service/Safety Comm.

Council Member Christensen stated that we have a lease agreement with the Park District (Mr. Bollman from the Park District is in the audience and that he spoke with Mr. Mullally today), that the Park District is in charge of managing the activities within the Park District pursuant to the lease agreement, and that the City has no regulations in our Code re. special events, and that he reviewed regulations of liquor in the Park District and that they have their own ordinance and are in charge of granting permits and permission for the use of alcohol in the Park District. That several people wish to conduct a disc golf tournament, and rather than spending a lot of time this evening hashing out the rules that should govern the activity in the Park District, the appropriate way to handle this is to put it back to the Park District and let the Park District deal with it as it is an event within their purview. The Park District is supposed to govern the dispensation of liquor within its boundaries, and based upon other permits and applications and making sure that those aren't precluded from the use of the Park during that period. That is the appropriate way to handle it in light of arrangement we have with the Park District as they are in charge of the use and consumption of alcohol within the leased area, and that it is our responsibility as City to provide police protection and if Park District requests police protection and public safety requirements, that we should do that and Service/Safety Comm. work with the Park District so this event can happen - can vote on it next week and that would be his position.

Council Member Bjerke stated that the Park District is meeting tomorrow and that this is on their agenda, and council will be voting next Monday night. We have the special event funding and if want to access that money have to apply at appropriate time - and asked if we approve request will the taxpayers be paying for the overtime, potential for a lot of money to be spent by Police Dept. on this event. That we need to have clear, concise plan - security and parking - toilets, trash . Mr. Gomez stated beer garden staffed appropriately, trash containers adequate, security. Mr. Bjerke stated he thinks inappropriate location for inappropriate event, disagrees with the name, 4-2-0, and doesn't think the City should be involved.

Some concerns were expressed re. comments made that nobody can have any alcohol in the park, even with permit - cannot preclude people using the park to bring in alcohol with permit as is a public park and not for private function. Other comments were supporting this as a 3-day event, no beer garden on Sunday and have security in addition to police force. .

Vice President Glassheim stated his sense is that Mr. Christensen has stated the position correctly, that this is a Park District function and if they approve it, the City will stand ready to assist in supporting functions and would like to see if properly controlled but is a Park District decision.

Council Member Christensen stated the reason he suggested one day that it is an event that could grow into a 3-day event but rather see it be successful the first time, properly planned, on a Saturday or Sunday; that the neighborhood has no idea it is coming and would have to have some arrangements for it, and have others that use the park. That he was told by Mr. Mullaly that they couldn't preclude others from using the shelters or using the park for that weekend as they have already issued the permits, this is the only location in the city where you can have a Frisbee golf tournament.

Hugo Gomez stated the Park is open to all the public and is only using the first 18 holes, and there is a additional 18 holes in the park that is open to the public, and that they can enjoy the free activities for the kids at no charge. Vendors will be out there - shelters will be used by his sponsors - Cold Stone, Best Buy, and a shelter for himself and emergency personnel that he plans to have there, and one for Joe Blacks for beer garden close to the stage - all the shelters are being used. Tournament will be held professionally with the help of the City.

Mr. Swanson stated that the City and the Park District have entered into a lease agreement for a large portion of the greenway, that the area in Lincoln Park is under control and jurisdiction of the Park District, they have adopted an ordinance which regulates the use of alcohol in their premises - that once the Park District does issue a permit or were to issue a permit for alcohol, must be served by licensed vendor and the vendor does need a special alcoholic beverage license from the City and that is issued administratively, and not by the council..

Chief Packett stated estimated cost for staff would be 21 people - 7 per day for 3 days, at est. cost of about $10,000 range - funding comes out of their General Fund budget and would seek reimbursement out of the Special Event Fund. - 1 day would be one-third of that amount.

Council Member Kreun stated it is the Park District's responsibility, and they will make recommendations on whether or not this event goes forward, we will look at security portion and will work together; and this application should be followed through without any variances, whether this will be for one day will also be analyzed by the Park District, and we will look at our Special Events Fund that for security - want to look at all the aspects of it, it is a city event and this is the first time it is being proposed and that is why it has more scrutiny, but go through same process with all the other events. That a lot of questions can be answered by staff and recommendation brought to committee for action.

2.4 Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan.
There were no comments.

2.5 Change Order No. 1 for Project No. 6334, Dist. 464, storm sewer, and Project No. 6335, Dist. 638, paving and lighting in Shadyridge Estates 8th Resubdiv. ________________
Dean Rau, assistant city engineer, reported they would be changing most of the work onto this year's project, doing storm sewer and earth work this year and next year do the remainder of the project. Change order based off the $965,000+.

2.6 Bids for Project No. 6363, Flood Damage Repair.
There were no comments.

2.7 Budget, Change Order approval authorization, and Amendment No. 1 to Engineering Services Agreement with EAPC for Project No. 6320, Riverside Pool Restoration.____
Council Member Bjerke stated he viewed funding source, that he will not vote to raise taxes, that
if this were to be paid in cash he would vote for it, but not vote to raise taxes, inappropriate. He stated since open the pool and run it for portion of this year, there is potential to have operational shortfall, and asked if staff could contact the Park District and let us know the balance of the funds in the Park District Foundation 501C3 set aside for the Riverside pool, and if no money, what is the plan for next year.

Mark Walker, asst. city engineer, reported he will check to see what the balance is, and that he has had conversations with Park District staff about operating it for the short period of time this year, they are intending to hire staff and there will be some operational expense for this year, electrical use for the month that it is open, but expenses for operating the pool should be minor for this year.

Several council members stated that when the promotional campaign was put together people knew about cost for the pool, that it was going to cost about 12 cents/month per household - 70% voted to have a pool that would cost no more than $1.1 million to refurbish instead of a second pool that would cost $7 million, public was aware, and made the right decision. That changes to cost are very minor, asking to go up to $1,050,000 which is under the approved amount that is to be spent, in rehab situation only 14% over estimated cost, and under circumstances the contractor and staff have done excellent job keeping project under that $1.1 million.

2.8 Appointments to Historic Preservation Commission.
Council Member Bjerke stated why he would be voting no on this item next week, nothing
personal against people represented here, but has problem with the Historical Society, they denied personal property rights and caused the taxpayers millions of dollars, and not need to look further than the granitoid project to see proof of point; thinks that group and State group in their effort to preserve what they think is important overstep the balance of property rights and taxpayers money, and disagrees with that philosophy.

2.9 Purchase of landfill haul road easements and part of SW Quarter of Section 25, Rye Twp.___________________________________________________________________
Council Member Bjerke asked for review of funding, the funding source for buying the road and
funding source for the 35 acres. Mr. Feland stated the right of way acquisition along that road will be shared with the utilities, that right of way is needed for the roadway and the wastewater forcemain, roadway being paid by Sanitation, Water and Wastewater; and forcemain is Wastewater function, and right of way cost will be shared among those entities. The 34.00+ acres will be cost to the Water Utility and related to the water residual ponds.

Mr. Bjerke stated these are referred to as drying beds and asked for some explanation, roads and his question is on the CIP, if highlighted a quarter million dollars year for numerous years outgoing, and if that will be the money used to build these drying beds and roads, etc. out there. Mr. Feland stated if open the out-years where he replaced the $250,000 and in the 2009 budget, we have $270,000 for dredging and $350,000 for residuals project, and the $350,000 relates to the property acquisition and some land improvements to construct those drying beds. One of the challenges we have with those 4 ponds is not enough space to dry out the water residual (water sludge), so we can dry it enough so that we can beneficially use it, either as cover or landfill it at our landfill; one of the environmental requirements with solid like water residuals is have to pass filter test which means that they can't have pre water in it, that we would take it out of the cells, split out on drying beds and after a year would be dry enough so then could ship them off to the landfill. Right now don't have enough space to do that and what trying to ward off is to look at other ways that we could do the same thing, looked at wastewater lagoon and that is probably either $7 or $8 million project to retrofit one of those lagoons and not ready to give up our lagoons yet. In the past when we had a water reclamation facility off 3rd Street, that was demo'd as part of the flood protection project and to build one of those is $20 to $30 million, and in order to construct these drying beds , that wards off having to build a mechanical plant or retrofit our existing lagoons, and trying to do with the drying beds is let Mother Nature do a lot of our work as opposed to mechanical devices, let Mother Nature dry the material and get it to the landfill - lowest cost alternative that we have for now and into our near future - that is why we are asking to buy this property and make some improvements so that we can keep these water residual ponds going into the near term.

Mr. Swanson reported there is one remaining property owner that they continue to have discussions with re. need to acquire right of way for the roadway improvements.

2.10 Solid Waste Transport bid proposal.
There were no comments.

2.11 Public Works Department: Bid for Streets Division dual wheeled truck with crane body.__________________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.12 Public Transportation Dial-A-Ride/Senior Rider ADA mini van purchases.
There were no comments.

2.13 Public Transportation Capital Grant requests.
There were no comments.

2.14 Municipal Parking System.
Council Member Bjerke asked if we approve #4, Capital Improvement Plan, will that come back for further discussion. Greg Hoover, Urban Development, reported that all the others will be brought back except the elevator which they are requesting approval to do this year for $38,000 as elevator is inoperable. Mr. Bjerke stated there is $150,000 in excess sales tax monies available, cost of elevator at $38,000, and what will be done with the balance of those funds. Mr. Hoover stated they will ask for that to be brought forward in the 2010 budget for capital improvements.

Mr. Bjerke stated on #5 (Assessment for Corporate Center ramp construction), there is name that is similar to name of a bar owner and will staff make sure if that is the same person that fee is paid before that bar would open. Mr. Hoover stated they have contacted that gentleman and he has indicated that he wants to pay that over time, which they have allowed in the past, and he has a re-payment plan and is current with that. He also noted that when they initiated this report some time ago, had mentioned that Meadowbrook Furniture had been arrears in tens of thousands of dollars, through this process realized that had been coded incorrectly and dropped their assessment down substantially, they entered into a repayment plan and paid it off in 4 months rather than the 12 months that they would have been allowed; and wanted to make sure that was made public.

Questions were raised as to who will be doing the on-going parking enforcement downtown. It was noted that these items were deferred with exception of #4, which was authorized for fixing the elevator, and are approving #5.

Mr. Hoover reported that when the Corporate Center ramp was built there was a cost of a bit more than $4.4 million, that the City put in from various resources and federal block grant funds about $2.7 million, and the balance of that was to be assessed to the property owners in the parking assessment district for the construction (different than operation and maintenance). For the first 5 years after that assessment was to be made to the property owners, the city council directed that the City pick up 100% of those costs, and the next 4 years to pick up 60% of that cost, there is a balance of roughly $348,000 of the amount to be assessed to the private property owners and the funding sources that we have used are no longer available, been exhausted, and that will come forward to the council through another action item later this year to assess those property owners over 10 year period.

Mr. Hoover reported the formula has already been set and that will come directly back to the council for authorizing the assessment. Mr. Christensen stated the balance of the report was deferred until after Wednesday of this week because this facility and all of the downtown parking is before us for discussion at budget committee at 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday.

2.15 Fund 5996 - Budget amendment and Capital Improvement Plan for Noah's Ark.
Council Member Christensen stated that action on this request was held pending a review of the tenant leases at this facility, Noah's Ark is also known as Amazon Building in Industrial Park, and Mr. Hoover will get us leases to see terms regarding tenant's share of the improvements that are to be made to this facility, and once get that information will be prepared to act on it. Mr. Hoover that is correct with respect to the CIP, however, the committee did recommend moving forward with the budget amendment sans the money allocated for the CIP. On Monday will be approving amendment for purchase of the land for 48th - recognition of revenue and expenditure with respect to the land but the CIP is not in there. The reimbursement of Fund 5596 will be reimbursing ourselves and doesn't think it makes much difference to pay ourselves interest.

2.16 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of John Satrom for final approval (fast track) of plat of Satrom Second Resubdiv. (loc. at 3001 S. Washington St.)____________________________
There were no comments.

2.17 Request from Pribula Engineering on behalf of Philadelphia Macaroni Company for final (fast track) approval of the Replat of Lots 2 and 3, Blk. 1, Golden Harvest Addn. (loc. at N. 36th St. and 20th Ave.N.)________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.18 Request from AE2S on behalf of Johnson Farms and Turning Point, LLC for preliminary approval of the plat of McEnroe Second Resubdiv. (loc. on Garden View Drive east of S. 42nd St.).__________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.19 Request from AE2S on behalf of Johnson Farms and Turning Point, LLC for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend the zoning map to rezone and exclude from McEnroe First PUD (Planned Unit Development) and Garden View Estates PUD Area 3-1 and to include within McEnroe First PUD, Concept Development Plan Amendment No. 1, all of McEnroe First Addn. and McEnroe Second Resubdiv. (loc. on Garden View Dr. east of S. 42nd St.)
There were no comments.

2.20 Petition from AE2S on behalf of Turning Point, LLC and Johnson Farms for approval of an ordinance to annex all of McEnroe Second Resubdiv. not previously annexed (loc. in 3800 blk. of Garden View Dr.)__________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.21 Redevelopment Proposal for City-owned lot at 1431 Walnut Street.
The matter of an additional item from Urban Development relative to proposal by Doran and Marilyn Sand for construction this year of one-story house at 1431 Walnut Street, est. value $160,000, with lot bid of $27,500, was presented to the committee. It was moved by Council Member Christensen and seconded by Council Member Kreun to add this item to the agenda for consideration. Motion carried.
There were no comments relative to the item.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Portfolio Management/Summary as of June 30, 2009.
Information only.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Kreun reported that they had received copies of the Attorney General's opinion re. 911 Fees for construction and lease of space of operating emergency services, and referred this matter to Service/Safety Committee for consideration.

ADJOURN

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

Respectfully submitted,



Saroj Jerath
City Auditor