Print VersionStay Informed
Minutes of Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the Whole
Tuesday, May 26, 2009 - 5:30 p.m._________________ __

The City Council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, May 26, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. (following the Growth Fund (JDA) Committee meeting in the Council Chambers in City Hall with President Gershman presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Bjerke, McNamara, Gershman, Christensen, Bakken, Kreun - 6; absent: Council Members Glassheim - 1.

2.1 Alerus Center 2009 CIP and Business Plan.
Steve Hyman, executive director of Alerus Center, reviewed two documents, Business Plan and 2009 Capital Requests, stating Business Plan 2009 that they are committed to the success of the Arena, UND football and the Conference Center, that the Conference Center is the #1 facility in the state and region with no competition at this time. Since Canad's opening the Conference Center business has grown dramatically and the Conference Center now supports the Arena, and that their primary goal is to maintain the Alerus Conference Center as the #1 state and regional facility and increase the net revenues to support and underwrite the Arena and increase our entertainment mix and certify our partnership with UND and UND Athletics.

He reviewed events prior to 2001 when the Center was built and events prior to2007 when Canad Inns was built, and showed number of state and regional conferences in 2008, increase in 2009 events and future events which have been contracted or holding dates. He also noted number of events for banquets, conventions, weddings, meeting/conferences for years 2005-07, for 2008 and 2009 events which have increased. He noted that catering gross revenue surpassed $1 million; that State associations have returned to Grand Forks or have never been to Grand Forks. That the 2009 Action Plan is to request city council approval of 2009 CIP, complete all exterior and interior improvements, maintain our #1 status as the state and regional destination for conferences, football and Conference Center will underwrite the Arena, and the Conference Center will move the Alerus to independent financial standing.

Alerus Center Master Facility Plan; Two goals - become the conference/tradeshow/meeting ballroom destination of North Dakota and the region; and create a regional entertainment destination. He stated they are 3 facilities in one: indoor football stadium, arena, conference complex and reviewed the 2009 Capital Improvements:
Exterior metal panel - $100,000
Conference Center addition - $1,500.000
Suite level windows - 25,000
Exterior lighting - $150,000
Exterior marquees - $1,050,000
Interior finishes - $800,000
Way-finding signage - $100,000
Portable POS - $200,000
VFD Replacement - $200,000
Suite restrooms - $147,500
Escalators - $400,000
Pro Shop - $60,000
Total 2009 Improvements - $4,732,500.00 - and noted that this would be subject to the availability of monies; none of this has been bid and the one area they did received a bid on was the painting and exterior signs and they came in 20% under estimate. He stated he would prefer to get as many up to date numbers, bid some of the larger ones, and may, when this is all bid, come in under the $4.7 million and be available to proceed with the whole thing.
He also reviewed 2010 improvements totaling $5,970,000.00
Capital years beyond 2030 - $21,257,000
Building expansion (by 2015) - $13,000,000

Council Member Bjerke stated that he would like to see the Alerus Commission present to the mayor, city council and citizens in June a 2010 capital plan and how pay for it; and also by July of next year, 2010 would like to have the mayor, council citizens have a long term plan for infrastructure presented to them; that they are talking about expansion of 42nd Street from 17th to 30th Avenue South, that he has a document from October, 1996 that this work includes the widening of pavement on 42nd Street from University to 30th Ave.S., and was part of the original plan, and that we find out what infrastructure is related to the Alerus, roads, sewer, water, etc. and have a plan for that.

Council Member Gershman stated that any business plan changes the minute you engage the consumer and your competitors, and that the CIP that we're talking about here are a change in plan to some degree, for the Alerus Center - he stated re. the road, that most people that use that road are not using it because of the Alerus Center but has become a major artery and disagrees with the position that we need to include that in any infrastructure cost and will have the discussion but didn't want that to sit out there.

Council Member McNamara stated his concern is a lack of definition of what capital improvements are of the Alerus but agrees that we ought to have a discussion on the road needs - as long as we have funds in that account that we can go ahead and spend those funds on the building and land acquisition, etc. and that we have to draw a line from fundamentally rebuilding the building to simply the capital improvements that are authorized by the citizens and agrees that there are additional capital recommendations on the way and thinks that will be an important discussion - need to look at the tax and when it sunsets and what it is used for because take the money that we need and let them endow the capital funds in the future and if additional capital required to build out a campus, then should go back to the citizens to seek their approval for that.

Council Member Bakken stated do upgrades and updates to stay competitive and that is what we are doing and is a good use of funds and need to move forward.

Council Member Gershman stated that the bond covenants do not allow the City of Grand Forks to spend any excess money in this account any anything but capital improvements for the Alerus Center, can't use it for infrastructure, property tax relief and to have the discussion about where we would put the money is moot, what we agree on and is to spend it wisely and the plan would be at the end of the bond that there could be $60 million in an endowment that would carry forward to do the maintenance forward for the building, that is the plan that he understand is out there, not to take every dime that comes in and spend it but to start creating an endowment as well as take care of and stay competitive and we don't have the luxury to take those funds and use them for anything else but the Alerus Center.

Council Member Christensen stated there isn't a compromise in his opinion to be reached - we have a community facility - and doesn't see any reason to talk about the Alerus Commission's capital improvement plan for 2010 because the moneys that would be available for that plan simply won't exist in 2010, may be there by end of 2011, or 2012. This facility, designed to be an event center and that includes conventions - and finding legs in the arena because of the Canad and of the water park facilities - we now have facility that will give us the convention facility - what we can do is create a lot of negativity in this community re. this facility which could preclude and close off people willingness to listen to the fact that we need a future fund to deal with on-going renovation and maintenance of this facility. The bond covenants don't preclude that but our Home Rule Charter does and when start talking about expanding the vision of the Alerus or the mission - we have to find a way of setting aside money out of the sales tax dollars we are collecting to make sure this facility is properly maintained - that is what the endowment idea is about - setting this money aside so that it is locked up and can't be used for anything else - and will have to go to a vote of the people because we have to change the Home Rule Charter,
trying to maintain a competitive advantage, the ultimate goal which is to have a premier class facility and have a source of revenue with it being collected by the sales tax dollars so that you won't have to raise taxes to maintain it - that we don't lose sight of the fact that this is going to be here for many years to come and be a future problem of future councils unless this or next council takes charge and shapes this so we have an opportunity to get the citizens to ratify what we have done and allow us to create an endowment for future commissions and councils to take away the problem that will happen otherwise.

Council Member McNamara stated that using those monies not endowment but using for operational subsidies. Mr. Christensen stated the conversation the council will have is the parameters of the endowment because as currently exists the money can only be used for capital improvements, and that means if we create $60-$70 million over the next 20 years, the question will be how much of the earnings on the endowment could be used, if any, for operation and not going to suggest what the conditions of the endowment would be or the foundation would be as far as using the money in the endowment - doesn't know.

Council Member Gershman stated the bond covenants state that excess monies can be used for capital improvements and for operations, our Home Rule Charter does not allow us to use the excess sales tax money for operations and decision that the citizens will have to make, is change the Home Rule Charter so that you can mirror our bond covenants so that we could use excess money not only for capital improvements but for operations which would relieve the economic development fund from any shortfalls they are now covering - that in his decision is to bring the Home Rule Charter and bond covenants in sync with each other overriding concern and that is something that we will not only debate but at some point put to a vote of the people so they will make the decision on that.

Council Member Kreun stated that the Alerus Center has a mission statement that came from the vote and the way people intended on using it - the mission statement is that the event center is to provide leadership that enables the Alerus Center to be beneficial to the regional economy, responsive to the patrons and accountable to the Grand Forks taxpayers - and that is one of the things that we are actually doing right now - everyone is saying we want a debate and openness and that is what is happening now. A year ago the council said to the Commission, we want to know the 25 year plan and that as chair of the Commission we have been putting together a long range capital plan which includes some of these items that we are talking about will be replaced several times in the life cycle of the building, and what you are asking for is what we are putting together as a commission, and that is what is coming to you now - is very open and upfront, and is part of the process and benefit from our mission statement. Our mission and goal is to live up to that statement and with comments made tonight - very difficult to run it like a business in the public venue and we will be able to do it as much as can - that is our goal and have all of these discussions any time people would like and go forward.

2.2 Application for property tax exemption for expanding business by Philadelphia Macaroni Company, 1801 North 36th Street._____________________________
Council Member Bjerke stated this is a 5-year declining process - 100%, 80%, 60%, etc.
and equivalent of 3 years, and this is to set the public hearing - they are looking at 8 jobs for 5
years and believes in property tax cuts for all, and not playing favorites.
2.3 Respread special assessments for Project No. 4440, Dist. No. 386, Storm Sewer Drainway; Project No. 5677, Dist. No. 434, Sanitary Sewer on Adams Drive; and Project No. 5678, District No. 283, Watermain on Adams Drive._______________
There were no comments.

2.4 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6432, Dist. No. 465, sanitary sewer on S. 48th St. from 17th to 32nd Aves.S.______________________________________
There were no comments.

2.5 Design, Bidding and Construction Administration Engineering Services Agreement for Project No.6432, Dist. No. 465, sanitary sewer on S. 48th St. from 17th to 32nd Aves.S.________________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.6 Bids for Project No. 6338.1, rehabilitate DeMers Avenue Skyway Bridge.
Council Member Bjerke stated that we budgeted $488,000 and est. cost is $360,000 and
where does the $128,000 go when this is completed. The city auditor stated the budget amend- ment will be done from cash carryover from 4169 fund and will go back into that specific fund.

2.7 Bids for Project No. 6341.1, Traffic Signal at Intersection of S. Washington St. and 47th Ave.S._____________________________________________________________
Council Member Bjerke stated this is stimulus package money and if don't spend as much
as what needs to be spent, does this money stay with the City and use it for other projects or what happens to the money. Dean Rau, asst. city engineer, stated that if we come in under the cap, money is obligated and spent within that time frame and we will not have access to this money until after that, which means it will be gone - goes back to the federal government.

2.8 Emergency Action Plan for Riverside Dam.
There were no comments.

2.9 Authorization for mayor to sign NDDoT Cost Participation Agreement addendums for economic stimulus projects. ____________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.10 Application for moving permit to move garage from GF Air Force Base to
924 Cherry Street. (public hearing on 6/01/09)________________________
There were no comments.

2.11 Downtown Design Review Board appointment.
Council Member Gershman asked if this group is doing anything with signage, so many
signs in the windows, cleanliness outside of some of the buildings on Friday and Saturday night could be improved and would like to know if this group is addressing some of those issues - City should not have total responsibility for cleanliness of downtown but businesses should - and would like to have message to this group to do more on those issues.

Brad Gengler, city planner, stated jurisdiction of the DDRB revolves around issue that requires
building permits, there is a separate group apart from this DDRB that will be placing garbage
cans and program of maintenance on sidewalks, but DDRB would have jurisdiction to discuss signage on businesses, etc. and the Board has talked about it in the past.

Todd Feland, director of public works, stated they have met several times at Safety Comm. apart
from the enforcement issue of the downtown bars but containers will be placed downtown in next week or so, do some sidewalk cleaning and have engaged the downtown business owners and that this organization needs to come up and clean up the area and some action in the next two weeks and will pass on message of keeping the area clean.

2.12 Appointment to Special Assessment Commission.
There were no comments.

2.13 Consideration of Amendment No. 1 to Engineering Services Agreement and consideration of bids for Project No. 6399, North End Water Tower Rehab and Smiley Tower Demolition._____________________________________________
Several citizens addressed this issue. David Combs. Gordon Iseminger and Jerry
Waletzko with reasons for keeping the Smiley water tower.

Council Member Gershman stated they are talking about $400,000 to $500,000 to keep that tower
for possibly 8 to 10 years and very expensive to fix it, can't just paint it and hope that it will be fine, that he couldn't support it, and hears more from the public not to save it.

Council Member Christensen stated that that he has not had one person call or ask him to save
Smiley, costs a lot to preserve and loses its significance because cost is so incredibly high.

It was noted that if the street is widened at the area of the underpass, that wall will come down
and that the tower would be in the way, two years ago this was brought up and there was a public drive at that time, so if saying we are not giving it enough time, that is not correct, been over two years that have had the opportunity to do this. Mr. Waletzko stated he is asking if truly needs to tear it down - and was looking at a 5 to 6 year horizon.

Council Member McNamara stated this came to us because of the refurbishing of the north end
water towers and council looked at what we would do with Smiley, either fold the rehabilitation into it or its destruction and what pushes the issue is to be money - he stated after we had one of these debates, Mr. Iseminger was here with different monies that were available to refurbish things, and were at Urban Dev. and asked Ms. Peg O'Leary to see what kind of money is available, and reported there is no money available, that it is not on the historical register and funds not available for something of that nature - that we have looked for money to see if could raise what could through historical grants, etc. and based on grants plus City's money could make some kind of compromise - but the money is not there - commend you and hope you can raise the money in a hurry , but have gone down these trails that people have laid out for us.

Mr. Iseminger stated he has not had a single person tell him to tear it down, but rather save; and
asked them to understand his frustration, have lost one after the other of historic structures in Grand Forks, lost so much in the flood and what didn't lose because of flood or fire, took down for expansion, and water tower be the next one - and soon not many left of historic structures in Grand Forks - served on the GF Historical Preservation Commission and has approved in-fill houses and fought hard to save the Riverside pool and bathhouse - the Opera House and takes credit for saving that building, his profession is to reserve history and bothers him to see everything they have lost.

2.14 Engineering Services Agreement with Webster Foster Weston for Project No. 6459, 36 inch Outfall Inspection and Repair.______________________________________
Council Member Bjerke stated that storm water has to do with the landfill, and whether there was any discussion about whether the landfill projects should pay for this or if this is the best place to fund this from. Mr. Feland stated it is stormwater wastewater outfall line and needs to be rehabilitated, currently not being used because of a parallel line that we use as an outfall line, and did have cash that could rehabilitate this line and his recommendation is that this is the best way to rehabilitate that line using these monies.

2.15 Public Transportation Digital Video Mobile Surveillance/Security Equipment bids via a Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with King County Washington Metro Transit._______________________________________________________________
Council Member Bjerke asked what is plan for audio - Mr. Feland stated his plan is that it would be video only and has had conversation with Mr. Swanson, and his plan of action is to have Mr. Swanson provide an analysis and at this time would only use the video portion of it. He will bring this back to Service/Safety Comm. when he has an answer about the audio.

2.16 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program.
Pete Haga stated this is a request to approve a list of projects for this Program and
to authorize proceeding with the joint project with the Grand Forks County and reviewed background of this program and some of the priorities. He stated the EECBG Program was authorized in 2007 Energy Security Independence Act and was appropriated and the AARA at $3.2 billion and $2.8 million was funding for energies that include the cities, counties, state, townships and the purpose of the program is to reduce fossil fuel emissions, decrease total energy consumption, create or retain jobs, improve energy efficiency in the transportation building and other entities consuming sectors and spur economic growth. This grant program is an opportunity for locals to exercise real leadership on energy reducing strategy and encourage job growth and creating energy efficient solution and encouraging deployment of new energy technology.

Every city, county, township was allocated over certain populations certain amounts of money based on a formula that was used for Community Development Block Grant Program, Grand Forks as a city was allocated $505,300 and the County of Grand Forks was allocated $64,500 and formula based upon did not have to have competitive application for this, however, we do have to apply for the funding and part of that application in order to receive the funds is to develop a strategy.

The strategy is determining how the city of Grand Forks will use their funds. He pointed out is that the City of Grand Forks already has taken a leadership role in this area over the last couple years and recognized some of the action that has been done already that would fall under these objectives - initiating greenhouse gas inventory, supporting mass transit system, supporting bicycle program, bike and bus program, improving traffic signal synchronization, converting street lights and traffic signals, LED, initiating energy efficiency building analysis for public buildings, proceeding with methane feasibility study at the landfill, establishing green theme within city staff, , promoting and extending use of the greenway, creating a G3 or Green Grand Forks website, and also working with our congressional delegation to support programs such as this.

He acknowledged that the Mayor has been a supporter of this program for over a year and worked with our Congressional delegation to help with the authorization and the appropriation of this program. He stated what is before us is more than a laundry list of projects that we have as an opportunity to make an impact in the energy sector to set a course and build a foundation for progress on this topic. Before you is a broad range of projects and based on their impact and on sustainability on the stimulus of the local environment and also job creation and retention: and reviewed the project list: and that the council would be asked to do is authorize a joint location with the County and had an opportunity to speak with the County Commissioners last week and they wanted to proceed with an application and were not sure what to do with their funding as hadn't considered it yet, but found out that we could put in a joint application for the City and the County and through staff we did offer to go in and do that, that it is a small amount of paperwork and that since we were proceeding with filing of an application for the City it would not be much of an extra effort to file a joint application with the County and that their staff would not have to submit an application, it does not mean that funding between the two entities is tied, each entity has the opportunity to provide funding and allocate funding as they best see fit; however, there is opportunity to leverage the funds between the two entities. The programs are: 1) Energy Alliance /Energy Office which is a broad based weatherization program; 2) Traffic Light Synchronization Project, that we have proceeded with a pilot project to synchronize the traffic lights on 32nd Ave.S. last year and was resounding success and to expedite this type of synchronization throughout the main thoroughfares of the city; 3) Landfill Methane Feasibility Study, and have committed to a pre-feasibility study and know there is methane in the landfill and need to know who much there is and how good is the methane and there is significant impact of ability to reutilize that energy on the capture and firing of that methane; 4) Central Fire Station Retrofit, that many of our facilities are little dated and this project would be to address the HVAC system and provide an annual energy savings as well as cost savings; 5) Geothermal (Wellness Center) recognizing that the Wellness Center is entering into a new development and district and providing not only geothermal, power for the Wellness Center but for the whole district and includes entry level housing, potential commercial and adding value to that entry level housing to that district; 6) Administration - to help administration. There are some other projects based on the comments made by the Public Safety/Service Committee last week narrowed the projects to those just mentioned at this point.

Dr. Brett Weber, 412 South 6th Street, Grand Forks, one of the authors of the Grand Forks Energy Alliance/Feasibility Study and also as a citizen and voter, stated that he has lived in Grand Forks for not quite 5 years and is best place he has ever lived, esp. in the summer and worst thing about the winter is the heating bill. He stated he is a supporter of the energy alliance because he is frustrated with the current situation in terms of making his home more energy efficient, and was here to encourage council to use some of the energy development block grant funds to support the Grand Forks energy alliance.

He described the description of the energy alliance is an effort to help people spend a little money to save more money, but mistake to think that everyone should be able to do this on their own, that an energy audit can show problems that the naked eye can't reveal, today's energy audits include the use of blower doors and infrared cameras in hands of trained technicians, work to repair beyond fairly competent do-it-yourselfers. The energy alliance is proposing that a public/private partnership, a one-stop approach, would offer middle income home owners to following four elements: 1) independent objective energy audits home owners can trust performed by local auditors, can get an audit through Xcel Energy who hired people from St. Paul who schedule audits in batches but we need to train, hire and pay local workers to do this. 2) once an audit is performed the energy alliance would help owners connect to local contractors specifically trained in the necessary techniques and help contractors receive this training and set of standards to protect homeowners and contractors; 3) some owners may not have ready capital to pay for necessary upgrades, and energy alliance would provide local financing options; 4) the energy alliance would provide a follow-up inspection process to assure that savings are being realized.
Further you have an opportunity here to help homeowners in our local economy rather than sending ever larger checks to St. Paul, and have an opportunity to make use of federal seed money to create a self-sustaining process independent of government support or intrusion, and urged council members to vote in support of using federal money to invest in our future and need you to support the development of the Grand Forks Energy Alliance.

Council Member Kreun stated this was brought to us before Safety/Service Committee and work on the traffic lights synchronization on 32nd really seems to be working quite well and is huge savings to the traveling public and also to continue with the methane study at the landfill. One of the largest users for the city is the wastewater treatment plant and if can utilize that study to enhance and reduce that cost; the fire station was built in 1977 and still has original components in it as far as doors, windows, etc.; the Wellness Center was the next one on their list and if that is to be built, and put a geothermal that is not a city -owned building but belongs to citizens of Grand Forks, and those were their comments, only question they had was if put another person and add cost of monitoring or operating the system which is $75,000 cost for 24 months for that individual.

Council Member McNamara asked if the funding requires the hiring of an additional person to get the grant. Mr. Haga stated that this does not require hiring of individual.

Council Member Bjerke stated he doesn't agree with some of the premises, doesn't buy man-made global warming and doesn't agree with some of the premise, lot of consensus but lot of scientists who don't. He stated he would support the traffic lights, the landfill, methane, central fire station and to upgrade city buildings and should focus on those items as that benefits everyone, and is leery of creating another government program.

Council Member Gershman stated there are concerns about the creation of another office that could end up becoming large and question of funding. Dr. Weber stated it would be the ultimate goal that this would become a self-sustaining independent from any kind of a government program, the process would simply run itself once it was set up. He stated they are looking to create a one stop shop where people can get independent objective information to save money; and that could eventually be supported through user fees to help support that process. The process of learning how to become an auditor to buy the necessary equipment and training is expensive and if there isn't a pool of contractors ready to do the work, there is an important role for governments in helping to give this a quick start, there is a fantastic opportunity with the federal monies to support that government buy-in but this is not about creating a permanent new government bureaucracy for a brand new government office, this is about cheap starting a process that can then be self-sustaining and essentially be taken over by contractors, banks and homeowners.

Mr. Haga stated the long term goal in weatherization will be taken off on itself and goal is a pilot project to get things up and running, most of what they have received back is the lenders are interested in high rent loans, however, not as interested in the lower end and that is why the proposal year is to offer the low interest lower end loans - one of the main points of this stimulus act is to retain and create jobs, and going through the list have a lot of good projects to move forward with, however, that part of the goal is to spur the economy and have had enough feedback from some of the contractors that would provide that opportunity for them - there is a long term of weatherization is that it should be able to take care of itself - at the energy office is the proposal for an 18 to 24 month contract and position - that one stop shop and encourages the energy audit, market and encourages this type of market for the contractors and encourages the financing and promotion, education that makes this program and effort available to residents of Grand Forks. Before you is a notation on the energy office, there are more competitive grants that are going to be available in the neighborhood of 30 to 40 Million dollars and that is just this year, and will continue working on appropriations of further grants, to seek those grants which would cover the administration of that person. One or two of the other issues - traffic lights and synchronization - and would like to amend from $100,000 that is recommended to $225,000 and that the City Dept. of Transportation, federal transit, and there is another funding department - MPO, leveraging $125,000 of this grant to expedite to encourage about $650,000 traffic light synchronization project that will go beyond 32nd and doing Columbia Road this year, proceeding with Washington and Gateway in near term and also with DeMers and 42nd. There was also mention that we ought to be doing things with the City buildings first - there is an RFP that has been let under the direction of the administrator, Mr. Duquette, working with Dean Rau, Engineering Dept., for requests for proposals that will analyze the energy use of our buildings and come up with a plan for performance contracts and to clarify some of those suggestions and moving forward with traffic lights synchronization, and city buildings.

Council Member Christensen stated he has some concerns about creating another office and some concerns about $75,000 for 2 months, $37,500 person, and what happens after $75,000/year, that they get benefits and insurance and $100,000 for revolving energy efficient grants. d do we have anybody trained to do the audit, is it reasonable that we can get this done and get some homes done before the next energy consumption season. Dr. Weber stated they are looking at a limited number this season and we do have to get up and running - Excel Energy does provide a good audit and have to appreciate the work they provide and in giving that audit to a community, there is also at least one other local member who is taking an advanced course on auditing and is one of those things, and if the market is there then that would drive some of that training and create the auditors.

Mr. Haga stated that there is a joint application issue with the County, and in looking through this proposal and opportunity of energy efficiency block grant that one of the target areas was on the weatherization and there was a general support of being able to do a joint city/county effort to provide this to our residents throughout the city and county, and that the implications are that this would be one of the first type of joint city/county projects with this type of grant, and they have not allocated how they are going to use their $64,000 and may be recommended by this body or otherwise perhaps some of that is used to help with the administration and this type of function, and perhaps that could be signal sent to them.. Mr. Christensen stated that should just pass the $175,000 in this alliance and put it in Urban Development Office and they could work it out after that, would have staff and then decide what you need for salary and when get to $64,000 from the County, add onto the $175,000 and have $250,000 and would probably work and they wouldn't have to put any more people on it either - Mr. Haga stated he would bring this recommendation forward to provide weatherization and appreciates the opportunity that you are giving him.

Kent Keyes, director of Red River Valley Community Action, stated they have administered weatherization programs for low income households for over 30 years and gave some statistics from their 2006 evaluation, these numbers come from Xcel Energy and MDU, and gave examples of labor and materials, and of savings for the low income population. That is when had limit of $3500 on labor and materials, the stimulus now lets them go up to $6500 per household and think of what doubling that figure can do to the savings numbers. These are grants.

2.17 Amendment to 2008 CDBG Annual Action Plan for use of American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (CDBG-R) funds.________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.18 Redevelopment Proposals for City-owned lots.
Council Member Bjerke stated he had question on 1518 Chestnut, and asked if they are
going to resubmit. Mr. Hoover reported they did resubmit once, panel reviewed it again and
asked them to make some further modifications - our staff has stepped in to provide additional assistance to them to try to get this to pass and expects to have new proposal within next two weeks.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

Council Member Kreun questioned whether the update on PSAP project should be put on as an agenda item next week, voted for this project and tabled because of financing; that they are going to build the antenna and move radio system in the police department, this is one time expenditure and is going to be done whether we add the building or not, they need more room, more equipment, etc. and asked if they should put that on as an agenda item and vote on it next week because it does add up to $424,000, and perhaps Mr. Morken can explain it further. Mayor Brown stated they could move to suspend the agenda and add to the committee of the whole agenda.

It was moved by Council Members Kreun and Bakken to suspend agenda and put this item on next week as an agenda item. Carried 6 votes affirmative.

3.2 Update on PSAP Communications Project.
Al Morken, director PSAP, reported that on March 16, 2009 this matter was tabled - the resolution regarding moving forward with the PSAP relocation project, and that he was asked to bring back some information - the State Legislature didn't pass revocation of the 12-year vote and in the year 2014 the 911 vote will have to come up again and determination made whether dollars continue, however at this time there are parts of this project that they would like to move forward with - 1) tower next to the police department building, have variance from the Board of Adjustments and been okay'd by Downtown Review Board and been presented to the Historical Preservation Commission for approval - and also looking at moving the radio equipment from the basement of the police department building to main floor and moving the 911 phone system to main floor, and working together with the communications grant, switching to a simulcast system within the city of Grand Forks which will give the police department, the fire department better coverage throughout the city.

He reviewed funding: $1.4 million in cash carryover, cost to build the entire project was little over $2 million. He stated that they are going to be paying for the maintenance contract for the new radio system which will take money away from the 911 funds and the cost re. the cash carryover will continue to deplete. He stated it is $1 per cell phone and $1 for hardline phone per month; that if people voted against that then there is no money to fund the 911, and that they would still need to have the 911 service within Grand Forks County so at that time the cost would then go back on the property taxes.

Mr. Swanson stated he was directed by this body to request an Attorney General's opinion, on Friday inquired of the A.G.'s Office and they have not completed their review, and will contact them again tomorrow and inform them the item was in discussion tonight and were requesting an expedited opinion.

Council Member Kreun stated his questions re. what they are asking for is to do a portion of this project now because we don't need an A.G.'s opinion to spend this money, can do this particular part of the project and utilize those funds without any question - then we can receive the interpretation on how those funds can be spent and if those funds can be spent with capital then can certainly do what you are suggesting. Mr. Morken stated they would be looking at redoing the floor plan as had radio communications system as part of the overall floor plan, and will be using the 911 funds to mitigate the issues with the phone system and radio communications.

3.1 Bids for Project No. 6303.1, reconstruction of English Coulee Shared Use Path from 24th to 17th Ave.S._______________________________________________________
Christensen stated he doesn't know what the Park Board has decided to do re. this project, but has a meeting on June 2 and will discuss this further. There is $100,000 in the budget for bikepath repairs and that we have a project planned to do some work on bikepaths along the English Coulee adj. to campus; UND's bikepath, there has been some dispute that the City did damage to the bikepath during the previous floodfight and that debate has been going on for sometime and there was an agreement that the City would repair it. He stated because of new regime, should revisit that issue because if we could use that $100,000 or part of it and correct the bikepath that is the first bikepath in the city and is in the worst condition. Mr. Walker stated current estimates of redoing the UND bikepath is around $50 to $60,000 and shortfall that the Park District has is around $50 to $60,000 and possibility to cost share the overage and do both.

6. MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

Mayor Brown commented on various items during the past week and upcoming events:
Congratulations to graduates this weekend and thanks to those who participated in the Memorial Day services yesterday because freedom comes at a high cost and have to recognize those who paid the ultimate price for that.

7. ADJOURNMENT

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

Respectfully submitted,



Saroj Jerath
City Auditor