Print VersionStay Informed
Grand Forks City Council Service/Safety Standby Committee
Tuesday, March 18, 2008 - 4:00 p.m.__________________________________

The city council of the city of Grand Forks sitting as the Service/Safety Standby Committee met in the council chambers in City Hall on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 at 4:00 p.m. Present at roll call were Council Members Kreun, chair; Bakken, McNamara, Gershman.

Others present were Al Grasser, John Schmisek, Earl Haugen, Todd Feland.

Chair Kreun called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m., there were 3 items on the agenda, with possible addition of item re. sole source for mapping equipment software for police department.

1. LAWA update.
Al Grasser, city engineer, stated this is monthly update on the Lake Agassiz Water Authority, that in issuing the Record of Decision (ROD) on the project, new timeline is late March or early April, and things little bit off rule until get that record decision, and to review that record decision is basically the State Dept. reviewing the EIS and work activities to make sure that everything has been covered. He had also attached a Memo Documenting the Decision-Making Process for the Red River Valley Water Supply Project Study as added information. Kreun stated that the State Water Commission just passed a $1.8 million budget with $500,000 or $600,000 for Garrison Diversion so have plans together for Lake Agassiz Water Auth. for the next year and will be looking at purchasing or obtaining R/W for some pipeline on some of the water contracts, preliminary steps and nothing permanent at this point in time; and is important that we follow up on this, and wants this committee to be aware of what is going on because at some point in time there is going to be some financial aspects put to it, possibly next year.

Mr. Grasser stated the City's contribution of dues was about $80,000 and just getting into the opening rounds, one of the attachments is the latest funding plan for the Red River Valley Water Supply based on the numbers in the EIS, and is a 3-way split with federal government providing about $220 million, local share $220 million but is part of a federal loan and State coming in for $220 million, none of these entities have committed to these numbers yet but that is the latest draft, and that there have been a number of drafts of funding options. On the local number of entities involved is quite long - communities in rural water districts and probably 40 or 50 of them, big players are Fargo, Grand Forks, West Fargo, Cass Rural Water, Wahpeton, East Grand Forks. Gershman stated he has heard there is tremendous amount of politics, and on State level some issues. Kreun stated part of that has been mitigated, one of things that has come to agreement is that just about everybody realizes that it is a realistic situation that we are going to be in at some point in time, at the beginning everyone said why need to worry about water for because just finished building dike but the State Water Commission and research we have done with consultants that it is not if it is going to happen, but when and are indicating that it will take place and is a long process and have to work with federal beauroacucy, State and with our own - that they are working very diligently on making sure we have quality water that comes to us down the Red River and not just used water, and working into the intricacies of it along with generalities of it - lot of work to done. Grasser stated that perhaps should present that at COW, and in some of the upcoming meetings get some breakdowns as to how the $220 million is broken down into local individual communities.

Our $80,000 goes into the work plan; but when we get into the actual construction phase of this will be talking multi-million type participation levels; and the $80,000 is our dues and will start some of the preliminary work. Timeframe - in about 2013 have water and most aggressive schedule would be starting in 2010 and about 3-year construction plan, but probably slip from that. Kreun stated he didn't think the $80,000 would change a great deal in the next few years; and we will not be bonding ourselves, but through the LAWA and then we will have water contracted with LAWA and would assume get to the point where it will come off our water utility bills. State may participate at different levels based upon whether it is domestic water supply or industrial water supply and any predictions today would only be based on assumptions.

McNamara stated that if we are only paying on utilities during drought who funds the bond. Grasser stated we don't have answers because some of it is based on negotiations that they will enter into with he Bureau of Reclamation but federal loan payback is generally accepted that it is going to be much more generous payback for us than a commercial type loan and discussion about 40 years and rolling into an 80 year; and that they will be seeing something in the next few months. Kreun stated that there could be a base fee and later on if we need it, the user fee would increase at that time or have a fee all the way across - haven't nailed that down yet; and nothing is built into our water rates now; and have looked at between $2 and $10/month and when actually need it, pay for it, and also depending on the quality of water, if we can't be assured of high quality water, then we want some compensation and help in building our water treatment plant and are going to try to tie that in also. Grasser stated that during drought the water we get is return flows from Fargo and with the western droughts is the technologies developing more where communities have the ability to return those flows themselves and recycle within their own community, Fargo is starting to do that already, running a pipeline to an ethanol plant by Casselton from their wastewater, treating and selling their wastewater, and we need to be a player so we can continue to have wet water basically otherwise industry can't locate here because we don't have the water permits for reliable water supply during drought and that is why seeing a lot of industry farther out west where can drill wells, etc. Kreun stated we want to make sure we are a player so that we get our water rights and not only reused water, that we are guaranteed a certain amount of water. Grasser stated that is in the Baldhill Dam but the studies show that water out of the Baldhill Dam is not enough to get us through the 1930's drought. This is not an issue yet but will be down the road.

Kreun stated the design is going to take up to two years. Grasser stated they will start the design in 2008, this year, and this is going to be a moving target until other partners, the State and federal government would let us know how and when they would pay because they may not be able to bring the money to the table at the same timeline, and can see timeline stretching to accommodate the budgeting process of the government. Kreun stated they would continue to bring committee updates so they are aware of it.

2. Review of city capital improvement cost sharing policy and possible modifications.
Grasser reported they have a new round of projects coming up this year, and started looking at the CIP policies and that some have been implementing the last couple years on a project by project basis, and several they would like to change. First item is cost sharing of street lighting, and originally set up a separate table and is to mirror the street cost sharing, his recommendation is to use the same cost sharing as streets and highways for new construction and reconstruction, so whatever type of project we have we cost share the same. The other item is sanitary sewer, had some discussions, and as of now the City is paying the difference between a pipe in the 24 to 27 cut range and anything in excess of that. One of the things that has changed is that OSHA is now requiring that at 20 ft. rather than requiring standard trenches, have to have an engineer trench at anything deeper than 20 ft., and change in pipe thickness to handle pressures at that depth, and 20 ft. change point where can expect some significant changes in prices from contractors, and it also reflects on wastewater master plan and starts to identify a transition where going to a collector type system compared to laterals which actually service the homes. He stated they are proposing changing the spec. in identifying and changing the cut ranges instead of 3 cut ranges looking at 4 and last cut range before 20 ft. would be 16 to 20, and City would pay the difference per foot.

It was noted that most of this takes place on major trunks, and South 48th Street would be closest example to that, and is not something that takes place in residential areas. Grasser stated he is taking the discussions they have had about trying to ease some of the special assessment burden to some of these areas and this goes along with that philosophy that if we don't want to do that change some of these numbers. Kreun stated this helps the property owner but puts the burden on the City as City will be picking up larger part of the tab. It was noted a number of these would be caught by tapping fees so it is whether we get the money back and how much.

Grasser stated that in new construction they break down streets by classifications, that collector streets without federal aid, the City has a basic policy of 20% cost share but in last year's budget they identified $390,000 that they had used towards developing a trunk infrastructure and that means collector type streets in new areas, and that fits with new construction and they talked that $390,000 would represent all of the costs of installing a new street in a newly expanding area, the problem is the time from which they did those calculations in 2003 or 04, and costs have greatly increased so that $390,000 doesn't do a half a mile street like it had originally been intended to do; and that they have been bouncing around a lot on some of the collector type streets because have streets like 47th where have federal funding where only assess a nominal 20%, have had some streets like 38th which was assessed 80% and City 20% cost share; and also have a program that could give somebody a free street and not comfortable with the perception that some people are going to have questioning why that street free and why paying 80% on mine. 80-20% is a more consistent basis of being able to assess those types of streets because when get federal funding that is a nominal 80%, and would assess 20%; and under this program, when funding is available, that is up to the city council to budget that, and then use the 80% and property owners see a consistent 20% assessment on these new types of streets, and if look at the list there are a lot of spots where you get into collector type streets and makes for more consistent program. He stated they will be implementing that and the first project is 40th Avenue South from Clearview to Washington, and even though working towards eliminating special assessment district, just don't have the funding to take that step.

Grasser stated he would like to see a motion recommending approval, but that he has one more item on the list - that on all seal coating projects that he is proposing that we would basically pay local streets without federal aid, City would pay 50% for rehab. and pay seal coating as mill and overlay; and rather than invent a different policy or participation rate for that, but just make it all the same so have a straight 50% participation rate in the maintenance and rehab projects irregardless of what they are. - Eliminate the note and then it just goes back to original policy.

It was moved by Bakken to approve CIP policies as follows however McNamara stated he was not comfortable seconding the motion as he would like to review info. with Mr. Grasser and the matter was held and will be brought back in 2 weeks.

3. Review of street and highway needs.
Grasser stated this is a summary and that replacing and/or rehabbing streets on a 30-year cycle and would need about $9 million and that they get money on federal aid urban package and have some money budgeted in our street repair budget and do get money for regional projects at about $2.6 million, that we are investing a substantial amount of dollars but because of magnitude of the problem out there still have about a $7 million shortfall to reach the goals he would be recommending. He also included some of the more detailed background of how they come up with that number and there is a table re. age of streets before rehabbing, and at that time had about 213 miles of streets and used about $1.3 million per mile based on board average of what it would tale to replace streets and gives total system replacement value of about $270 million and that those numbers based on 2008 dollars can increase those up by 30-40% - and is suggesting a reasonable goal est. street life is est. at 30 years and if wanted to replace/rehab those on a 30-year cycle would need about $9 million/year prior to netting some of the federal dollars about $7 million. He stated in addition to that there is besides the streets, broke out some of the traffic signals, school crossings, that streets are the biggest item. He noted this is replacement cycles and there is also a document that the MPO has put together, and although replacement fits into this to a degree, a lot of this is capacity driven than street condition driven; and this is taken out of the latest long range transportation plan. He also noted they included info. giving guidance of short term projects, and mid-term and long term projects and gives idea of when these projects will be developed to handle the capacity issue. He stated the ND number is $163 million but we have to come up with cost shares and matches, and his intent is give that information out and not asking for solutions or actions but to make committee aware of transportation system and needs they have identified for capacity, and that the MPO study is only for classified streets and do not address the local streets - lot of work out there and depends on what we can afford and try to accomplish. There are some discussions going on in Washington about the next transportation bill and gas tax dollars aren't being generated sufficiently to keep the system up to the level that we had previously and in that declining revenue market there have been discussions about raising gas taxes or vehicle use taxes to generate the dollars that go back into the transportation system; and another discussion is reducing the aid they send down to the local level but out costs are not being reduced.

Kreun stated that in the next legislative session we have to make some trips to Bismarck to do some work with the transportation system. Grasser stated that the State is getting input from some of the local communities and they are planning to attend that to reinforce our needs; that on the federal side we are recipient state as we receive more money that we send out - there are some states that get less than they put in and they would like to see some of that changed on State level.

4. Sole source purchase for forensic mapping equipment software, police department.
Chief Packett reported that for several years the police department has been looking at upgrading their capability on crime scene processing forensic mapping whether traffic fatality or a homicide scene, that those scenes need to be mapped and chartered properly - that now unless you have the Highway Patrol come in (depending on their availability) to help with laser mapping and 3-d imaging, they do by hand; this would allow them to partner with the Highway Patrol and the BCI and no general fund dollars involved. He stated that the Drug Taskforce periodically gives seized asset money back to the participating agencies and typically we get from $10 to $30,000/year as our share for participating in that agency and currently have about $40,000 in seized assets; that this would be an expenditure of approx. $21,000 and would train 10 of our officers (8 uniformed patrol and 2 from detective bureau) in an 80-hour training session, and would ask the council to allow them to sole source this to the same vendor that the Highway Patrol bid this equipment on, saves about $10,000 for the unit. He stated they would take the equipment to a crime scene and will not only take pictures to scale but laser three dimensionally the crime scene and put that into a power point for presentation in court. He stated a little more emphasis for us is the traffic reconstruction.

It was moved by Bakken and McNamara to forward to council for approval. Motion carried.

Adjourn
Bakken and McNamara moved that we adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Alice Fontaine
City Clerk