Print VersionStay Informed
Minutes of Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the Whole
Monday, March 8, 2010 - 5:30 p.m._________________ __

The City Council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, February 1, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. following the special city council meeting in the Council Chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Bjerke, McNamara, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Bakken (teleconference), Kreun - 7; absent: none.

Mayor Brown commented on various items during the past week and upcoming events:
George and Betty Widman, Widman's Candy has been a staple in the community since 1949 when they first opened their store, they boast of four generations of candymakers that started in 1800's with George Widman's grandfather. On March 12, 2010 George Widman will celebrate his 90th birthday, and proclaimed March 12, 2010 as George and Betty Widman Day in Grand Forks and encouraged all citizens to join the celebration and wish George a Happy 90th Birthday.

CBEI PRESENTATION

Diane Blair and Barry Wilfahrt made brief presentation of what is happening re. Grand Forks Air Force Base realignment. (BRIC - Base Realignment Impact Committee is partnership of the City, County, EDC, University of North Dakota and The Chamber; BRAC - Base Realignment and Closure Commission which was federal law and impacted Grand Forks Air Force Base). Since BRAC recommendation became law 5 years ago, the Base is being realigned from a tanker mission to unmanned vehicles, currently have 12 tankers left on Base and one squadron, that will be leaving the end of this year. Base personnel, both military and civilian positions, has decreased from little over 3,000 people by end of last October to little over 2,000. What expecting to happen is to start receiving some unmanned vehicles (Global Hawks and Predators) and should bring in 907 Air Force personnel to support the unmanned mission as well as the 8 Global Hawks and 8 Predators, arrival date has not been released by Air Force Headquarters.
Customs and Border Protection has 2 Predators located at Grand Forks Air Force Base; and with that Customs & Border Protection did open their UAS Operations Center for ND at GFAFB a little over a year ago, they do have staffing at the Base, 24 agents and General Atomics which is the firm that makes the Predator has 14 staff at the Base

When BRAC made recommendations realignment was suggested, the Base Realignment Impact Committee (BRIC) was put together to deal with that impact, and that there were a lot of other organizations in our community that had an interest in GFAFB and in the unmanned mission as to what was going to be happening and established the CBEI (Community Base Enhancement Initiative) and have members and resources including the Congressional delegation, Council on Military Relations and Office of the Governor, and resources who are people who have influence with what is going on at GFAFB, including the Grand Forks Air Force Base, UND's UAS Center, Dept. of Homeland Security, Air Guard, etc., that they have monthly meetings and is designed to create a unified voice so all know what is happening. The CBEI has about 30-40 people involved in it, and this group is co-chaired by Mayor Brown and Commissioner Schmisek.

Ms. Blair reported that CBEI developed several initiatives that they wanted to concentrate on and reviewed that information for the city council: training, public relations, procurement; expanding air space available in the region for UAS training missions: regional partnership; and infrastructure needs. They have hired a consultant out of New Hampshire that will be doing a feasibility study on the business park, finding out exactly what they do need, warehouse space, manufacturing, office space and when will they be coming, and plan for how we put this together.

Funding has been received through federal grants, the Office of Economic Adjustment (OEA), and have been receiving funding for the past 4 years; have done numerous studies, have funded the BRIC group and her staff position, that they continue to do that funding and will be funding the business park study as well.

Council Member Bjerke stated he serves on the County Planning and Zoning Board and that he was on the sub-committee for the wind farm development ordinance, that they are in contact with the Base to make sure that when wind farms are established they would not interfere with anything at the Base, if have any specific questions suggested that you contact the County Planning Director, but the Base is aware of this and they are currently reviewing the information they are given and are waiting for feedback from them.

2.1 Applications for exemption of remodeling improvements to commercial building at 217 S. 4th Street._________________________________________________________
Council Member Bjerke questioned the 5-year exemption as compared to previous 3-year
exemption. Mel Carsen, city assessor, reported that projects started after January 1, 2010 qualify for 5-year exemption where previously were limited to a 3-year exemption. It was noted that
changes had been made to the city policy and is at council's option but reason for change in length of exemption was to stimulate our economy, and brought our exemptions up to the State level. Ray Dohman questioned ownership of buildings; Mr. Carsen stated that these are all privately owned facilities and repair of buildings is made by the owners of the property.

2.2 Application for exemption of remodeling improvements to commercial/ residential buildings at various locations.____________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.3 Request by Dakota Commercial & Development Co. for tax increment financing property tax exemption - proposed Civic Place at 615 1st Ave.N.______________
Council Member Christensen stated this should go back to the finance committee as Mr.
Glassheim was of the opinion that he didn't want to see 100% the first year, but 80%, 60%, stepdown and should go back to committee based upon the two different projects and funding each received. Council Member Glassheim stated he would be interested in flat 80% exemption rather than full 100% or a declining 100% down to 60%, etc. and sounds like they wouldn't be eligible for the whole exemption as they didn't buy the land.

2.4 Request for transfer of alcoholic beverage license from Suite 49 to I-29 50/50, LLC dba Norman's Steak & Seafood, 2950 10th Ave.N.____________________________
There were no comments.

2.5 Amendment to Section 8-0103 of the Grand Forks City Code relating to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.6 Consideration of bids for construction of Project No. 6513, 2010 ADA Curb Ramps.
There were no comments.

2.7 Discussion re. committee of the whole structure.
Several proposals were presented relating to change in structure - Council Member Gershman suggested that over the last couple years have gone back into standing committees rather than standby committees, but starting to see that the committees are meeting every other week, and proposed that committees would have to deliver their agendas and be published on Saturday as council agendas are published - the two days following council meeting would have the two committee meetings, which is what we are doing now - and would have 12 to 13 days to consider the issues prior to council. That many items are discussed at a committee and are not being forwarded to council as informational items. He stated not proposing that we vote on this at the next council meeting but look at it on another committee of the whole meeting for further discussion, have it brought to each committee. That benefit for staff where staff could pay attention to their business and not prepare for meetings all the time, more efficient.

Council Member Bjerke's proposal was if eliminate committee of the whole then have committee meetings the week after council - Monday and Tuesday - and that every item on the agenda should be reassigned to either committee, otherwise have items come up to council that were not discussed at either committee. That all the Planning and Zoning items or administrative items would go to finance and have minutes and synopsis for review and if no discussion, move on.
That meetings should be televised and should be later in the day - 5:30 p.m. He also stated every Monday night meetings go to 7:30 and have discussion agenda afterwards, adjourn city council and then prioritize the topics and talk about them, whether budget, or different items to task force or work sessions. He stated he is not ready to vote on this but put things out for consideration.

Council Member Christensen stated why we have committee of the whole was because of lack of transparency, lack of public involvement, that went from14 person council to 7 person council, and during that time developed this structure, that he would never support committee meetings if get rid of committee of the whole and not have your committee meetings televised, how else will people know what they are doing. When they implemented this structure didn't have Public Info. Office and IT Dept. we have now and didn't have the entire agenda on the web and can watch it on TV. Wants reps. to be accountable and if concerned about convenience of staff, don't have to come unless have an item on the agenda. The finance/development committee probably has an agenda item once each month and the agenda is one or two items, not as many as on the service/safety comm.

Council Member Kreun stated he would like to have Mr. Duquette see what can do more efficiently so utilize staff more efficiently; scheduling problem with Planning and Zoning on Wednesday evening- one of the reasons had safety/service after council meetings so that they could get that information ready for the next council meeting. - should take good look at this over the next month or so

Council Member Glassheim favored the idea that it would save us two committee of the whole meetings each month, but that most of the items are never discussed, handled in committee and public won't see those, that if retain the possibility for work session on big items that require discussion that would replace COW meetings - suggested having a council meeting one Monday and the following Monday and Tuesday or Tuesday and Wednesday have committee meetings and give staff time to prepare. That if going to do this, have committee meeting televised, speaks to transparency issue, not sure re. P & Z, they are separate committee and not sure need to run them through standing committees.

Rick Duquette stated staff and department heads like the committee process and like the opportunity to bring those things forward, that the council works more cohesively with committee process, and tend to trust and value the work of that committee - the opportunity to televise the committee meetings would be helpful and if going to publish agendas for committees rather than for committee of the whole also has transparency - likes the process and committees effective way to go.

Council Member Bakken stated he wasn't in favor of extra committee of the whole but work out and bring back proposal and if on TV and if have special interest and show up for certain items on agendas, and comm.. of whole not getting much done - is for the change and move forward with this.

Council Member McNamara would like to go with suggestion re. time, meetings are 4:00 p.m. and leave work at 3:30 p.m. - the ability to move time back farther in day, 4:30 or 4;45 would be helpful - if go with Gershman's proposal have time for constituents. - do month of each and come back and that standing committees should be televised . and his proposal lets it breath a little so more time - comm.. meetings exciting at times

Council Member Christensen stated if eliminate COW, then the committee structure becomes more important and his committee doesn't cover as many items as service/safety - and questioned when this would be done, when new council comes in - put lot of pressure on staff getting ready for next meeting - and if eliminate a meeting still have to discuss it at council meeting and council meeting will get longer, and why do we approve P & Z actions if approved by State law. Mr. Swanson stated both city ordinance and state law require certain actions by Planning and Zoning Commission be adopted either by ordinance or by action approved by the city council, some items have been delegated directly to Planning and Zoning and those that come to council are required by law. Mr. Christensen noted that Planning and Zoning wouldn't have to be reviewed other than the action from Planning and Zoning and would come to the next council meeting.

Council Member Gershman stated he appreciates idea of 5:00 or 5:30 meeting, but thinks it is important that if going to do this, that committee meetings take place at lower level desks/tables.

Council Member Bjerke stated if Planning and Zoning doesn't get discussed but if finance gets it and reads it, then has been on TV and will be replayed if anybody concerned, and that it is critical that every item be on one or other committee, make sure everything in public light.

Council Member Bakken excused.

2.8 Mobile data computers for police department and request to purchase under State bid process.
There were no comments.

2.9 Grand Forks County and City of Grand Forks Joint Powers Agreement for 2010 Emergency Flood Fight._
There were no comments.

2.10 Public Works Department - Sanitation Division collection truck, Bid #2010-6.
Todd Feland, public works director, reported trade-in would be included and decrease the
amount of the bid.

2.11 Public Transportation 2010 Transportation Improvement Plan Stimulus Projects.
Mr. Feland reported these are monies that going to receive as part of the Jobs Bill going
through Congress, received $1.2 million year ago in stimulus money; and expecting to receive another $1.2 million - and in last two years have replaced several transit buses and in spending this money looking at making some renovations to the building - upgrading some mechanical and electrical equipment in making more efficient building at City Bus.

2.12 Sanitary Forcemain Bypass Risers, Project No. 6570, and Forcemain Repair on Columbia Road from 26th Ave. and 28th Ave.S., Project No. 6569, Design, Bidding, Construction and Post Construction Phases Agreements.
There were no comments.

2.13 Refrigerated Sampler for Wastewater sampling.
There were no comments.

2.14 Request from Simmons Flint, 33 S. 3rd St. to serve alcohol in public right of way for private customer appreciation special event.
There were no comments.

2.15 2009 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER)
There were no comments.

2.16 Request from CPS, Ltd. on behalf of Grand Forks Park District for approval of petition for vacation of 7 1/2 ft. wide strip of S 12th St. R/W adjacent to Lots 13-21, Blk. 30, Holes Central Addn., being Grand Forks Curling Club located at 1124 7th Ave.S_
There were no comments.

2.17 Request from Planning Department for preliminary approval of ordinance to amend text of Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article 3, Rules and Regulations, Section 18-0311, Downtown design review board, and Section 18-0312 Outdoor seating on public right of way.
Council Member Christensen stated that the Downtown Review Bd., item 8, design
guidelines complied with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitating and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings - that in the downtown area every building is not historic, some are and others not, and time has come for review as to the necessity of Downtown Design Review Board provisions to see if it is something we should implement or if we should set it back a bit - it is counterintuitive to make someone that has no wish to have their building on the historic structure if they choose to make a change and have to comply with the historic structure rules because there is nothing that mandates that other than this. In looking at the Downtown Design Review Bd., but there aren't a lot of decisions that are made because there aren't a lot of design that is reviewed. He stated he pointed out to the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission that we have approved two buildings for the reconstruction or renovation of the civic building and the new one to be built has no involvement by the P & Z Comm. or the Design Review Bd. as to the exterior of those buildings - not sure there has been any approval of the exterior of any new buildings by this committee.

Ryan Brooks reported that the projects you have approved, those designs will still go through the DDRB for approval; and comment at P & Z was that all those buildings that are historic have to have those guidelines - that he will check the wording and verify that for you next week.

Council Member Kreun stated that one of the main things is the outdoor seating and does reflect and makes it easier for the business to utilize it, but concern is to look at as policy, if we have outdoor seating esp. for bars, etc. would be very difficult for the police department to determine at closing time who is out there with an open container - serving should be curtailed half hour or hour earlier before closing time.
Council Member Glassheim stated that the Downtown Design Review Bd. will continue in existence, and only change to the Board is taking the urban development director off and replacing with business owner - urban development will be represented as staff and not a voting member. Changes to the guidelines will be reviewed by P & Z and make a recommendation to city council, and city council will have final say on what those guidelines look like.

Mr. Swanson stated that because this is an ordinance in Chapter XVIII, Planning and Zoning Development Code, any change in substance has to be considered at the Planning and Zoning Commission at some point - council cannot act upon it until P & Z has considered it. Council Member Christensen stated it has been acted upon by P & Z and they did approve these changes, and now coming to city council for approval, council can review it and refer to committee, and then refer it back to P & Z. The Downtown Design Review Bd. was formed as a result of a flood for construction downtown, with hope that the construction would have an historic look, hence formation of this body and the rules, need a report from the Downtown Design Review Bd. to see what they have acted on in the past 10 years, changes implemented, etc.

Council Member Glassheim suggested passing the ordinance which provides for changes in the regulations and process to go through P & Z and city council, and whatever changes interested in having will be easier to make as a result of passing this ordinance

2.18 Request from Planning Department on behalf of City of Grand Forks for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Section 18-0204 and 18-0218 relating to definitions and auction houses as a conditional use permit in an I-1 District. _____________________________________
There were no comments.

2.19 Request from Michael Marcotte for final approval of plat of Shadyridge Estates Ninth Addn. (loc. on Desiree Drive). ____________________________________
There were no comments.

2.20 Smoking ban ordinance.
Mayor Brown stated this was administrative error as this was not on the agenda but at the February 24 meeting it was stated that this would be discussed tonight.

Council Member McNamara stated he was contacted by several members of the Hospitality Industry and would move that we table this for two weeks. Council Member Bjerke seconded the motion.

Council Member Gershman asked to abstain from voting on this matter and it was so moved by Council Member Bjerke and Christensen. Carried 5 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the motion to table and upon roll call vote the following voted "aye": Council Members Bjerke, McNamara - 2; voting "nay": Council Members Glassheim, Christensen, Kreun - 3; Council Member Gershman abstaining. Mayor Brown declared the motion to table failed.

Council Member Glassheim reviewed process - that at the public hearing it was announced that this would be on the committee of the whole on March 8, that the Hospitality people were there and that it is in the minutes - that it was announced well in advance - and as there is no voting tonight and that if the council votes on it, will take two more council meetings before final passage - if decided to put on the ballot will take one meeting of the council for final passage - that people had an opportunity to be heard.

Mr. Swanson reported he had sent Memorandum to council members dated March 4, and that there is an error in the third sentence - it should read Version B permits smoking in the outdoor portions of a bar provided that no alcoholic beverages are sold or served in the outdoor area - strike the word prohibit and substitute permit - ordinance is correct. He stated that no action would be taken on the ordinance tonight as it has not been introduced, introduction would be next Monday and would come back at a subsequent council meeting. Council Member Christensen questioned if this will be put to a vote of the people and when have to have resolution form submitted to the county auditor - by April 9.

Mr. Glassheim reported that at the work session they recommended by 3 to 2 vote that an ordinance be introduced on second hand smoke having the following changes - leave the exemption now in existence for tobacco stores in existence but not allow any new stores to be licensed, grandfather one that is there but nothing be allowed for tobacco stores in the future; leave the exemption for an owner operated business with no employees; would in the exemption create no smoking for bars, party rooms and truck strops, the exemption would be eliminated; smoking as part of cultural spiritual ceremonies would be retained, as well as some exemptions in state law about nursing homes and hospitals which we don't want to touch because they are in state law; and an important item that was suggested if we were going to do this, that we leave 4 to 6 months after passage for the ordinance to take effect so that the bars would have a suitable time to get their patrons ready and understanding what was going to happen. There was discussion about smoking outdoors for bars and two ordinances were drafted by the city attorney at request of council, one which allowed an outdoor smoking area and the second allowed an outdoor smoking area into which patrons could bring their drinks, not be served there, and could not have food there; effective date November 1, 2010 to allow time for it to go into effect, should it go into effect.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Mosquito Control Lab Construction.
Information only.

4. CITIZEN REQUEST

Doug West, 1107 14th Avenue South, #1, stated he lives in garden level apt. in four-plex, apartment redone after flood, has found mold in his apartment along with infestation of bugs because of the mold problem; was told by Alerus Property Mgmt. there was no mold, has tried to tell health department, and last week urban development came over and gave the place a passing grade - they need to respond more quickly and garden level needs to be redone in that building. Mayor Brown informed him department heads will work with him.

Ray Dohman, Rural Route, Greater Grand Forks, stated that last week council voted to purchase three homes, one at 722 University and one at 606 Reeves Drive, and after vote asked who owns the house and purchase price and was told didn't know. It was noted that the vote on the building was not to purchase but to renovate the buildings; that they had asked Bd. of Realtors and they had no financial interest in the buildings. Greg Hoover, urban development director, reported that Mr. Dohman came to his office and gave him the information he requested, and asked for some additional information and is in the process of compiling that information now and told Mr. Dohman it would be available this Wednesday explaining entire process.
Mr. Dohman asked about the unmanned vehicles and if the City had entered into an agreement with the Air Base and people proposing that program. Mayor Brown stated we are actively involved in remote piloted aircraft and is future mission for our Base, is unmanned aerial systems and is the future of the Grand Forks Air Force Base. It was noted the City wouldn't sign agreement as this is military mission. There is an air space that is being negotiated with the FAA and general aviation and University of North Dakota, etc. and is a complex issue and there are meetings going on to resolve the restricted air space so the drones can go up, but does affect general aviation and to some degree commercial aviation which is why FAA is involved with the airport, with UND and with Air Base. City has nothing to do with whether drones armed or not, this is national defense, and assuming they are armed.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Christensen asked Mr. Hoover when he responds to the council regarding Mr. Dohman's inquiries, to please tell the council to remember that the homes that were purchased were part of the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, that was a requirement by the federal government but if wanted to participate in that program, we had to buy foreclosed homes and renovate them, staff looked hard to find the foreclosed homes, bought below market and that got the City of Grand Forks into the queue so it could participate in federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program as administered by the State of North Dakota, funded by the federal government.

2) Council Member Kreun stated we all have questions and all go through our own process to make sure that our questions are answered to our satisfaction so that we understand what is taking place within the council, within our committee meetings and within the city. If there is such a dissatisfaction, every two years there is an opportunity for somebody to run for this position, that is the way the political system works and would suggest that.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Christensen that we adjourn. Carried 6 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



Saroj Jerath
City Auditor