City of Grand Forks, North Dakota

Employment - City Directory - Contact Us

17787
October 1, 2001

PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
October 1, 2001

The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in the council chambers in City Hall on Monday, October 1, 2001 at the hour of 7:00 o’clock p.m. with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 12; absent: none.

Mayor Brown announced that anyone wishing to speak to any item may do so by being recognized prior to a vote being taken on the matter, and that the meeting is being televised.

Mayor Brown stated that today is Dr. Dean K. Midboe Day, October 1, 2001, and read proclamation stating that Dr. Midboe has served Grand Forks as a dedicated OB/GYN physician for the past 30 years and that he is retiring from his practice which began in Grand Forks in 1971 and that retirement will allow Dr. Midboe to continue to enjoy more time with his family and travel; and proclaimed October 1, 2001 as Dr. Dean K. Midboe Day in the city of Grand Forks.

COUNCIL MEMBER GLASSHEIM REPORTED PRESENT

Mayor Brown announced that this is domestic violence awareness month in Grand Forks, there was a tree planting ceremony at the Johnson Park which was attended by people in the community who were concerned about domestic violence in our community and read numbers of women who were killed by their husbands or boyfriends in the United States; and that in our community we need to continue to support the Domestic Violence Intervention Group; and thanked them for their support.

Mayor Brown welcomed any distinguished guests in the audience.

COUNCIL MEMBER KERIAN REPORTED PRESENT

Mayor Brown invited everyone in Grand Forks and surrounding communities to the Alerus Center tomorrow evening between 4:30 and 8:30 p.m. for a fundraiser, free will donation spaghetti feed put on by the fire department, there will be entertainment consisting of Dick King Band, Sweet Adeline’s and Fallcreek; the funds will be made available to the New York Fire 911 Fund, and encouraged community to support our fire department in supporting New York’s fire department.

Mayor Brown reported that the EERC had their mortgage burning ceremony today after 50 years of service to the community, state and nation, and congratulated EERC.

FLOOD PROTECTION PROJECT UPDATE

Al Grasser, City Engineer, briefly reported update on the flood protection project:
Technical work update from the Corps of Engineers - Stanley Consultants who is doing the sub-con-sulting work, has completed the design and incorporating comments received from the draft technical review.
The Phase I levee project contractor, Nodak Contracting, has started construction of the storm lift station at Almonte and 8th, they expect to initiate construction at 13th Avenue South in about two weeks, following that they will be doing the demolition of the Almonte Nursing Home and levee construction may begin this fall, weather permitting, and begin in Olson/Elmwood reach.
Pioneer Construction has mobilized at Riverside Dam, work should be completed in about six weeks.
English Coulee Diversion project bid has been delayed, and looking for a present target date to reinitiate advertising, bids would be let in late October.
Discussion re. Gowan Construction on demolitions - there are two foundations on Grassy Hills where houses removed last week, two foundations on Olson Drive that were taken out last week and backhoes were working on one of the foundations and possibly done today; contractor also working in Hughes Court where they finished demolition and backfilling of one of the last open holes, and were starting on interim levee and are trying to incorporate all of those phases at the same time.
English Coulee Pump Station - plans complete and advertisement in the next week to 10 days, bid opening first part of November; there is a significant change on that - had been trying to get closure done to prevent backup water for the 2003 flood and missed this construction season, won’t have benefits of that closure until 2004, not on the critical path so should not impact the final completion date to the entire construction project but does expose us to flood waters for one more season than we would have liked.
Construction Engineers has mobilized at the water intake site, and construction will begin soon.
City Staff/Consultants update: Gowan Construction has mobilized in the Olson/Elmwood area and is removing pavement and utilities from the reach of Elmwood Drive that will be on the wet side of the levee. Construction almost complete on Lift Station 1 which is Lincoln Park area and No. 5 which is near St. Anne’s Guest Home, remaining is demolition of the old lift station 5 (sanitary lifts).
Numerous utility relocates are still underway on the English Coulee alignment and United Crane & Excavating has completed the majority of relocating water and sewer lines in the Olson/Elmwood area - some problems with services that didn’t go to the line expecting and working with residents to rerouting some of their services.
Local funding end - had special assessment hearing on September 25 and that issue will be addressed at the October 15 city council meeting and to certify special assessments for the first phase of the flood protection project.
Acquisitions: the goal set for obtaining property is under the accelerated construction schedule and would like to pick up all the remaining properties that are scheduled to be acquired in 2002.
English Coulee - some delays in property acquisitions, one outstanding issue is at Columbia Road and 40th Avenue where some redesign was done to meet some of the local concerns and to implement that need to acquire some of those easements from the property owners, waiting for final plans to come through for the Corps and to review with residents.
Phase II: there are some potential alignment changes in the Northridge Hills area, the Corps found in the detailed design that there were more challenges on soil stability than what originally thought which pushed the levee closer to several homes than were anticipated and had meeting with those residents, will meet again to discuss options as might be some changes re. levees/walls.
Historical properties: at the end of this year of the 14 homes that they have agreement on, one mandatory and two optional homes will be relocated - 4 houses will be demolished and 5 mandatory and 2 optional houses to be addressed and will be addressed next year.
Interim flood protection: the contractor is trying to coordinate the interim flood protection with the final house and basement demolitions, were working in Hughes Court area and move along to Olson/Elmwood area this week.
Upcoming meetings: they are planning to have a Phase II partial take meeting - will meet with property owners where looking to take partials of their property and first meeting will occur on October 11 in the council chambers.

Mr. Grasser stated he would like to update the council - that they are working on ways to contact the residents in the area relative to the flood protection project, doing almost door hanger notice to people who are adjacent to the construction activity letting them know schedule and who to contact, primary contact is contractor directly, that this is a different process and have a different arrangement with the Corps than typical arrangement, normally they have a consultant who puts together the plans and City will enter into agreement with the contractor and both entities work directly for the City - with the Corps process, Congress appropriates the funds to the Corps for use on the project, the contractor is through the Corps of Engineers who is in charge of it but not consultants for the City and when we need to have something done, we need to work through that process - this is background to let council know we have different relationship with this group of people, and wanted to forewarn people that they are looking at large projects that could go on for extended periods of time and will ask everybody’s patience to put up with construction activities as will be pretty intensive out there and contractor will be making decisions about where to stockpile dirt and topsoil, materials, etc. and working extensively.

Council Member Klave stated that when they receive phone calls, who is to be contact person to answer questions. Mr. Grasser stated they will have a meeting later this week and will outline the whole procedure through a chain of authority and hoping to make chain clear enough so calls don’t go to council members but come to the contractor or staff, and will communicate that back to council.

Council Member Christensen stated that it has come to his attention that there maybe some issues regarding cost overruns, that they have budgeted an excess in bond sales but some additional costs associated with the construction of the dike based upon some of the estimates. Mr. Grasser stated some of the bids received so far are above engineer’s estimates and as projecting those out, they are looking at over-running some of the original bid estimates. Council Member Christensen stated that the $6 million of dike betterments ($2.2 million remaining from summary), if that was something we can hold in reserve to off-set some of these increases and if can, then perhaps suspend working on those projects anticipating to defray cost overrun; and something that should be discussed in the senior leadership. Mr. Grasser stated they would be discussing that and another of the issues is to formulate an engineering view on the 3 ft. of floodwall extensions which was estimated to cost the City about $3 million, latest estimate to a little over $5 million; and looking at a number of other things - contractor has pointed out several areas where materials, etc. costs higher, and some of that has to do with the aesthetics (masonry on DeMers Avenue pump station and Olson/Elmwood pump station), and in future contracts want to look at being a bit more utilitarian and/or trying to look at doing staining and texturing type things with precast as with the floodwall. Council Member Christensen asked that the senior leadership group address this issue as quickly as possible and get back to them, that council decided to build floodwalls 3 ft. higher because they can put 3 ft. of freeboard on top of the dike, have made that decision and should stay with it. Mr. Grasser stated there is some information they have now that didn’t know earlier re. dike elevations and elevations on the east side on Highway 2 and the RR, and appears at a certain point in time the water will go around East Grand Forks and make them an island and is a safety valve feature that we weren’t aware of year or so ago and will look at very closely and talk with senior leadership group; and clarified for people concerned about floodwalls, they are not talking about changing aesthetics on the floodwalls.

Council Member Brooks asked what procedure is on the project if something comes in over budget, if it has to come to city council for approval or budget amendment. Mr. Grasser stated what would come to council would be betterment portions of it, when looking at overall project local share, including State money, is about half or quarter for us and most of our money goes to property acquisition and utility relocates upfront, and in construction end that is being funded on cash flow basis by Congress and even if those bids come in high they may or may not have a direct impact on the City. He stated when we bid English Coulee closure and English Coulee Diversion channel within the next month, and Phase II of the levee this winter, will have good handle on the cost at that point in time. Mr. Swanson stated that the project is actually an Army Corps project and City has no authority to approve the bids, have ability to review them and be informed on the budget, but if the Army Corps awards the bid and it is higher than what you anticipated, that’s their call and City doesn’t have any direct approval authority over that, but have some ability to comment and express opinions. It was also noted that the projected cost of $350 million is the Corps budget for both Grand Forks and East Grand Forks. Mr. Grasser stated that they need to watch the betterments, etc. because those are things that we can control and are 100% city dollars.

Council Member Burke stated that the $52 million that the State dedicated to our project, that any cost overrun is split 50-50 because we’re obligated to half of the cost and expect we’re going to bump up against the $52 million limit from the State and cost overruns would then be 50% of the cost. Mr. Grasser stated he wasn’t sure we were going to hit the $52 million, and next couple bids let us know if we exceed those dollars or not. The city auditor reported that our original estimate is that the City would be funding about $76 million and would go beyond dollar for dollar match with the State.

Council Member Burke asked if the letter from the MPO with regard to the 17th Avenue corridor has impact as it relates to the Phase II planning; Mr. Grasser stated they received a letter from the MPO that alerted them to the fact that they had concerns on some of the concept plans that weren’t doing corridor preservation for a bridge, doesn’t think it is a problem because the City owns all of the land and we have control over that property and not sure what corridor preservation actually means as far as setting a R/W line or easement line and are preserving the corridor, may need some relocating of portion of golf course when and if that does occur. Council Member Burke asked if there’s a disagreement between the City and MPO about what constitutes corridor preservation, can they hold project up. Mr. Swanson stated he had not seen the letter and not prepared to answer that question; but agrees with Mr. Grasser that where we have acquired property we have control over it except in those instances in which we have used FEMA dollars where there are covenants which regulate what use can occur; and assuming that doesn’t come into play here, the ownership issues we have acquired free title and have full ownership. Mr. Grasser stated he would hope to have something prepared for MPO, and copies would be sent to the council.

Council Member Gershman stated that the $350,000 million includes 20% contingencies ($60 million) and a bit premature because of all the rerunning of the numbers and studying that’s being done to make a determination of where it’s going to be. He stated on the issue of the pedestrian bridge, non-motorized bridge on 17th, was surprised to see the letter, that they’ve been talking about this bridge for several months on the relocation, that it’s a long time since the City and the Greenway people have been talking about this bridge and at the eleventh hour the MPO writes us a letter, that this happened also with the trolley, need more cooperation and communication from the MPO and would like to know what their process was, and why waited so long to notify us. Council Member Bakken stated this matter is before us again because we left two corridors open, 17th and 32nd Avenues South, and the reason for the letter from MPO was because of information they received from the Park Board that a couple of the tees or greens would have been in the way if the corridor was ever used, and is to let the Park Board know that they may want to rearrange some of their greens.

Council Member Christensen stated he would like to get a summary of the bids as they come in with a breakdown as to what’s our share and what we would have to pay once we get to the 50% so we can keep a running total where we’re at, that we may not see that for 18 months and then council will have to make some hard decisions as to reallocation of our betterment dollars, and if forewarned that it appears to be coming in on the high side, and would like to address it so if have to spend more money, as we’re building a flood protection facility for the balance of this communities’ history, and future council will have to address it along those lines. The city auditor reported that in October his office will be providing a summary of the project, have worked with engineering, and have good report that will show the original budgeted amount, the bids as they’re come in, expenditures to date and various revenue streams that they anticipate paying.

Melanie Parvey-Biby, interim greenway coordinator, reported that the Greenway Alliance will be meeting on October 17 at the Alerus Center, and should be receiving information on that soon. She noted several events coming up in the greenway - the Goals group has been work on holding some fun runs, one in October and one in November. She stated that relating to the Christmas in the Park event, the contractors and the Corps have informed them that there will be quite a bit of construction activity in former Lincoln Drive neighborhood this fall and winter and there will be no access into this neighborhood, and have asked Christmas in the Park to be postponed for a year as construction should be complete within that area; and the committee has agreed to that.

ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3899, RELATING TO COLLECTION
OF EXCISE TAX ON TELEPHONE ACCESS LINES

An ordinance entitled “An ordinance amending Section 22-0403 relating to collection of excise tax on telephone access lines”, which had been introduced and passed on its first reading on September 17, 2001, was presented and read for consideration on second reading and final passage.

Upon call for the question and upon roll call vote on the ordinance the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the ordinance adopted.

CITIZEN REQUESTS

Frank Harlow, 110 Cherry Street, #102, asked that they continue with the public transportation committee because if they don’t, there will be people that will not know what’s going on with the buses.

APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 5, PROJECT NO.
5200, 2001 FLOOD PREPARATION

The staff report from the Engineering Department relating to consideration of change Order No. 5, Project No. 5200, 2001 Flood Preparation, with recommendation to approve change order No. 5 to City Project No. 5200, Flood Preparation contract in the amount of $45,000.00 with Gowan Construction, Inc.

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Martinson that we approve the recommendation to approve change order No. 5 to Project No. 5200 in the amount of $45,000.00. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

UPDATE ON HOUSE FOUNDATION DEMOLITION
STATUS
A staff report from the engineering department relating to update on House Foundation Demolition status, was presented to the council for their information.

INTRODUCE ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE
OF REVENUE BONDS PAYABLE FROM SALES AND USE
TAX PROCEEDS TO FINANCE COSTS OF FLOOD CONTROL
PROJECTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES

A staff report from the finance department relating to ordinance allowing sale of sales and use tax bonds, with recommendation to introduce ordinance allowing the issuance of sales and use tax bonds.

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Martinson that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 14 votes affirmative.

Council Member Bakken introduced an ordinance entitled “An ordinance authorizing the issuance or revenue bonds payable from sales and use tax proceeds to finance the costs of flood control projects and establishing procedures therefor”, which was presented, read and passed on its first reading.

AUTHORIZE CALL FOR SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION
PUBLIC BUILDING REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2001

The staff report from the finance department relating to General Obligation Public Building Refunding Bonds, Series 2001C, call for sale, with recommendation to call for sale of 2001C Refunding bonds on October 15, 2001.

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Martinson that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 14 votes affirmative.

APPROVE NEW ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

The staff report from the Urban Development Office relating to approval of new organizational structure of Urban Development, with recommendation to approve the organizational structure of urban development, job descriptions supporting the new structure, and approval of seven (7) classified positions funded by various grant/special project funds.

Terry Hanson, Urban Development Office, presented the restructuring of urban development and have the backing of Human Resources on their proposal; that he is proposing a restructuring of the functional organization of their department, that there has been discussion in the past about the hiring of an executive director as well as what the urban development department should be doing, and they are proposing to carry on the current functions, they are seeking that they add several employees and have a form of structure that allows them to carry out their mission. He stated the functions of their department are 1) quality of life issues for the city; 2) affordable and decent housing issues for the city, and 3) economic development; that they have 22 classified positions to carry out the functions and they are proposing to divide or create within the department of urban development six divisions which are: community development division, finance division, housing division, client services division, property maintenance division and administration. He stated the first five division would have managers and those managers would report to the executive director; that now many of the positions that report to those managers currently report to the executive director and is very cumbersome within the department and too much minute detail vested upon the executive director; administration division is administrative staff, office and administrative assistants as well as the executive director. He stated they are proposing to increase project-based positions from 22 to 29 in total and are asking the city council to approve first the elimination of three of the current positions within the 22 positions (including finance director, housing maintenance supervisor and the client services coordinator), and to add 10 classified positions (all 29 positions within the urban development office are project-based positions) as follows: CD manager position, finance manager position, property maintenance manager position, client services manager position, senior building maintenance worker position, economic asset specialist, finance analyst, an additional administration specialist, an additional accounting technician position and an FSS coordinator. He stated the reasons for the addition of those positions is that they can better serve their clients, and if given the additional positions under their current functions, they can provide for the city and clients and the county and residents of Grand Forks a more efficient and more productive department, and more productive services for the city. He stated they are asking for the approval of a structure utilizing the 29 employees that they feel will give more response to the six divisions and also asking that the council approve the job descriptions submitted with their summary so may go forward with adding the positions to the department.

Mr. Hanson stated that the City contributes approx. $130,000 for salaries to their department , Economic Development which provides $60-70,000 towards their administration, the remaining balance of administration comes from projects that they do for the city (administration of Town Square, parking ramps or of commercial buildings and/or industrial buildings that they manage and those are project based, paid from the revenue of those projects) - total salaries paid within their department of approx. $1 to $1.1 million dollars. He stated they operate on an annual budget of approx. $14-18 million, approx. $8 to $9 million of that is generated through the Housing Authority and balance through City functions: CDBG block grant, Home grant, program income on CDBG block grant or other projects - revenue from the Parking Authority, revenue from previously existing projects - that they manage the riverbank, other sources of funds are revenues generated from the physical assets that JDA and the City own, take some of those dollars to pay for administration of those facilities, and includes economic development funds that are available and administered through their office.

Council Member Burke asked what the relationship is between the urban development department and the housing authority - what is arrangement in terms of urban development department and housing authority. Mr. Hanson reviewed the background of the urban development department which has developed and been developing over 30 years, that the City of Grand Forks under an informal contract provides the administrative staff to carry out the housing authority function of the city and believes it’s a good working relationship, both entities have primary goals in mind. He stated 40% of the citizens of Grand Forks by 1990 survey census are LMI, are eligible for all of the services/programs provided by HUD and that’s a large majority of the population, and City’s relationship with the Housing Authority is it can utilize the Housing Authority to provide it’s housing objectives; that the city council by State Century Code does not have direct control over the Housing Authority and until about 1994-95 it was against ND Century Code to even have a city council member or a county commissioner on the board of any Housing Authority- but the mayor and city council do have input into who sits on the board (a five-year term for each member) - what the City receives under the present structure is the close communication between the City and the Housing Authority, both want decent housing and services for our clients and want economic development, rather than having the Housing Authority providing its programs as a separate entity and rather than having the City with a housing issue and how to answer our housing issues, the two now work together and have worked together under that scenario for thirty years.
Council Member Burke asked what arrangement urban development department staff have with non-profit housing providers in Grand Forks, whether a contractual relationship. Mr. Hanson stated the Housing Authority has written signed management contracts with non-profits and for profit to manage their project-based housing assistance program as well as to manage the properties themselves, but it’s a contract between the Grand Forks Housing Authority and the property owners/developers; that the urban development department is providing the administrative staff to the Housing Authority that carries out those management functions.

Council Member Burke stated in the minutes of September 6 Housing Authority meeting, the Housing Authority apparently passed a motion directing the chairman to contact consultants to request proposal for services and to put the current proposal for reorganization on temporary hold, and if the reorganization is what is before the council tonight. Mr. Hanson reported the Board requested him to put restructure on hold, that subsequent to that meeting Council Member Christensen asked that this be on the agenda, and that he went to the individual members and suggested that he would like to move forward with this presentation, and they did not gave a problem with that. Council Member Burke stated if they were going to go forward and continue the relationship with the Housing Authority as it exists, he wouldn’t have a problem with what he’s brought to the council, but doesn’t think that’s really the issue here, the issue is what’s going to continue to go on in the urban development department and whether or not the Housing Authority as reflected in the minutes continues to have that intertwining informal relationship and from the minutes of this meeting that the Housing Authority now has second thoughts about the relationship with the City, their ability to hire and direct staff to perform their mission and goals, and what they really need to do is not only allow them to go forward with a consultation with the consultant that they want, but for the Housing Authority to bring a proposal to the city council and for the council to discuss between two government entities what our relationship should be and how it should go forward and thinks premature to approve this reorganization until know what that relationship is going to be, and think figure that out in the next couple months, and would like to see task force formed and invite the Housing Authority membership to be on board along with several members of the city council that might be interested in this matter and have a joint recommendation from Housing Authority and the members of the city council on the task force to the full city council about how to go forward - premature to go ahead and create positions and possibly fill them, not knowing whether or not the people that fill them are going to be employees of the city, the Housing Authority or not be there at all.

Dawn Wilke, Human Resources, reported they currently have 14 classified positions under the city structure that are classified city employees of the Housing Authority; that what Mr. Burke is referring to is more of an organizational study, and if want to break those off or not; that he isn’t concerned about the functions of the people, but the bigger picture, but the problem is HR’s job is to look at what the people are doing currently and asked to move forward with that.

Council Member Gershman stated he questioned last week whether we should be going through with restructuring before hiring an executive director, it seems to make some sense that you don’t put a structure in place when hiring a director, doesn’t have a problem with the proposal, but seems to be prudent and good practice to wait and hire the executive director, and if put a structure in place it makes it more difficult for the executive director to make any changes and prudent to wait; and re. minutes from the Housing Authority is another reason to wait.

Mayor Brown stated they have been charged with hiring an urban development director, and have 40 to 50 active applicants for this positions, some are strong in urban development, some in housing authority and some in economic development, that he has to let these applicants know what the City is going to offer them when they come here and needs guidance from the council who to recruit because these people don’t want to be recruited and then we change the system out from under them, need communication to know who to recruit.

Council Member Bjerke stated that the job description for the executive director should have included “…and administrative coordinator” after mayor. He stated he is not for hiring a director right now, have a lot of employees that are temporary and need to make a decision, that if Housing Authority hires a consultant, and if want to form a task force and meet - that we need that but will take some time; and moved to approve the organizational structure of urban development, job descriptions supporting the new structure, and approval of seven classified positions funded by various grant/special project funds. The motion was seconded by Council Member Kerian.

After further discussion Council Members Stevens called for the question, seconded by Council Member
Kreun. Carried 14 votes affirmative.

Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Glassheim, Lunak, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 10; voting “nay”: Council Members Burke, Gershman, Christensen, Brooks - 4. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT
OF SELECTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS

The staff report from urban development department relating to affordable housing program, with recommendation to direct staff to proceed with development and/or implementation of selected programs.

Council Member Kreun stated he would like the motion to direct the staff to proceed with development of selected programs. Council Member Gershman seconded the motion.

Council Member Christensen stated that as he didn’t get to speak to the last motion he will be entertaining a motion to review what they did and that there are certain things that this council moved forward on rather quickly without addressing, that he received from Mr. Hanson a memo where he wants to call a Growth fund meeting for Thursday under economic development and the third item on the agenda was to discuss the future needs of Cirrus, but what Council Member Kreun has brought before us, a half million dollars of the $930,000 that we got from Cirrus was going to be used as a revolving pool for this program; and that seems to be opposed to a) economic development , b) housing, but can’t spend half million dollars from the same source twice, and that Mr. Kreun was not aware of that when he put this program together and brought it to council, and can’t imagine passing this and telling staff to implement it when - Council Member Gershman stated the motion was to study this and the issue of Cirrus is one of the things that has to be looked at. Council Member Christensen stated that a more appropriate motion would have been to table this for 30 days until they come back with a better plan, rather than to pass this, and made a substitute motion to table for 30 days until put a better plan together and then bring back to us and deal with at a committee of the whole meeting. The motion was seconded by Council Member Brooks.

Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Stevens, Burke, Christensen. Brooks - 4; and the following voted “nay”: Council Members Hamerlik, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Bjerke - 10. Mayor Brown declared the motion failed.

Council Member Glassheim stated he was against using the Cirrus money but for the overall program and for staff looking at other possibilities of finding money for that part of the program, and cutting that down to $100,000 rather than $500,000 of Cirrus money, and against property tax abatement; and if a lot of people against a program, staff should know that before they move ahead to bring it back to council.
Mayor Brown suggested a show of hands to give Mr. Hanson guidance.

There were some questions as to affordable housing. Mr. Hanson stated there are two industry standards for affordable housing, person should look for house no larger than 2.5 times their annual family income, and no more than 30% of your income go towards housing, and use those to determine if you can buy a $130,000 home, a family of four at 120% of median income there income is about $48,500/year; and programs they are developing is to bring the price of the home down whether by second mortgage or whatever program they propose to a price that is below the $130,000 so they now qualify both in income and in ratio of income to buy that home.

Use of $500,000 of Cirrus funds - 3 in favor.

Council Member Kreun stated that over the past 20 years Grand Forks has had affordable housing programs and not had, been a hit and miss project, and would like to sustain this over a long period of time and have a continuous program; and within this program is the infill property and rather than giving the property away, set up a trust fund that can be continuous, and sell the property and at the same time hit the targeted economic income of low to moderate, plus hit the targeted income of just above low to moderate which is 80-120%; these are the people who live in town, and people who work for a fair wage and are the ones who have the most difficult problem getting a down payment and/or closing costs, that is crux of the problem having right now and to overcome that we’re trying to find a funding mechanism that can be put in place so it is on-going. He stated he asked for the Cirrus funds, and if that that’s not available because of other projects there, and would be willing to look at $250,000 of the Cirrus funds and other rent rehab. monies that have been regenerated, and take that particular amount of money and put it in this fund for two years, then as sell the infill lots and create some income in our own fund, pay that money back to the JDA. He also noted that objections to the tax abatement, the reason they put the $130,000 limit on is to help sell the infill lots; and need tax abatement to make the full programs go.

Council Member Bakken stated that in the south they use modular and mobile homes as starter homes, and here we won’t give anybody the right to build in the area with modular or mobile homes. Council Member Lunak questioned the City getting back into the housing market, that there are enough homes and lots on the market in town that we have bought out and can do some things with those.

It was noted that the infill lots are in the floodplain and not for sale; however, there are some lots in the downtown area that aren’t in the floodplain and haven’t been put on the market yet because of historical mitigation and had to have lots available, and are getting that narrowed down and so could create an affordable housing program utilizing those lots, that we want to get structures on those lots, and if put on the market neighbors could get together and buy the lot and divided it in half and increase our yard, and that’s not in the best interest of the City because are 50 ft. lots that we have left, but want to develop housing on the lots, provide to families as an affordable home and give them an opportunity to have a secondary position with the City on those lots, and pay back down the road.

Council Member Christensen stated he had suggested that they take 20 of those lots and think “homestead” and what did to get people here and take those lots where they would have to live on them for period of time, rather than buying loan revolving;
that he would be against a tax abatement, only for $75,000; that they have sufficient money in your Home funds to do this program without the rest of the programs, and didn’t think they would be able to use the Cirrus funds, and suggested picking 20 infill lots and make them available either to buyers or to contractors to see if we have some homes that can get sold.

Property tax abatement on new construction with a cap of $130,000 (cap includes land) - 9 in favor.

Council Member Burke stated he also is concerned about the effect on the local taxpayer, that when we start earmarking some of these federal funds for these programs, it means that those people who have received those funds in the past may not be getting them in the future, that the council responded to that earlier during the budget process when some non-profit groups came in and stated they weren’t getting the money they used to get and the council antied up a $100,000 of local funds, are talking about how we guarantee if they come out of the pockets of some of the non-profits that are getting them now, they will come in and will have an impact on local funds. He stated with regard to the CDBG funds they are already being done. Mr. Hanson stated they have presented to the committee and to the council in the past years a program of affordable housing and under that program they have allowed themselves the ability to either fund down payment of closing cost assistance, housing rehab programs, acquisition programs and/or relocation programs, and in the past two years only funded down-payment of closing costs. Council Member Burke asked if we have done energy efficient rehabs, money that went to Red River Community Action; Mr. Hanson stated that one of the programs they carry out is energy efficiency or energy rehab to homes and supplied them with $170,000 last year for the rehab of homes to LMI families; they may have done some energy efficiency work. Council Member Burke stated that $550,000 earmarked out of CDBG funds, that’s more than we get in our entitlement, and not only using up our entitlement but also dipping into some of the program income which won’t be there in those amounts forever.

Council Member Gershman moved the question, seconded by Council Member Brooks. Carried 14 votes affirmative.

Upon voice vote, the motion carired 12 votes affirmative; Council Members Brooks and Bjerke voted against the motion.

APPROVE CHANGE IN FUNDING PRIORITY FOR
2001 CDBG SECOND PRIORITY PROJECTS

The staff report from the office of urban development relating to 2001 CDBG Program, with recommendation to approve change in funding priority for 2001 CDBG second priority projects.

Council Member Brooks stated he had brought up the issue of redundancy on some of these agencies that are included, number of thrift shops, Firehall and an Empire Arts Center that could be together, and when these items come up in the future that will be an issue that will be brought up. Mr. Hanson stated he has a letter regarding that issue from the Firehall Theatre and will provide copies to the council members; that there is a different venue between the two structures, that when they put on a performance it’s local artists, etc. and they come in six weeks prior to performance and start building props and rehearsing, and props stay on stage all through the rehearsal of that program, sometimes two to three weeks, and not able to tear props down and move out every day as might be necessary at the Empire Arts Theatre as they bring in acts and performers at various times; that they contract and pay royalties on the performances they present and the cost has to do with the number of seats available. He stated that the Firehall Theatre building was built right after the turn of the century and is almost 100 years old, is a contributor to the historical designation of downtown, and believes that building will be there and is in the best interest of the city to maintain it. Council Member Gershman stated that he is having lunch with representatives of the Firehall on Wednesday to talk to them and wants to hear what their concerns are, those are valid points and need to talk about it.

Council Member Kerian stated that the reason some of these organizations get into thrift shops is because it is a way to fund other services, maybe not the thrift shop that they should be questioning, but whether or not the services can come together.

It was moved by Council Member Gershman and seconded by Council Member Bakken that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.

Council Member Klave asked to be excused from voting on this matter. It was so moved by Council Member Kerian and seconded by Council Member Martinson; carried 13 votes affirmative.

Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Brooks - 10; voting “nay”: Council Members Lunak, Bjerke, Stevens - 3; Council Member Klave abstaining.

APPROVE ADDITIONAL CDBG FUNDING FOR CON-
TINENTAL HOMES, INC. LEARNING CENTER, SUBJECT
TO 30-DAY COMMENT PERIOD

The staff report from the Office of Urban Development relating to request from continental Homes, Inc. learning center, with recommendation to approve $35,000 in additional CDBG funding subject to 30-day comment period, opened on October 1, 2001, and amendment to 2001 Annual Action Plan, with final action to take place on November 5, 2001.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Bakken that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.

Council Member Christensen asked what the source of funding was as they have already allocated their CDBG money; Mr. Hanson stated as coming to the end of the year they are able to define more closely their program income for the program for 2001and that is where funding is from. Mr. Hanson stated that on the previous motion approval is if funding becomes available through program income to skip those three and move on to the next category, which is the Firehall Theatre, and in this motion is increasing the funding for an already approved project and the $35,000 to Continental Home will be funded out of program income prior to getting down to the Firehall Theatre and Empire Arts Theatre. Council Member Christensen stated the previous motion the council voted on isn’t going to be allocated as thought, but money first going to Continental Homes and whatever left will go in order of priority as Mr. Hanson stated. Mr. Hanson stated he didn’t want them to think he was trying to misinform them, the action they were asking on previous motion was to allow them to sidestep those three projects, and wasn’t requesting to fund the next two and was asking for authorization to bypass the three in case there are additional program income funds available, and thinks there will be to get through the Firehall Theatre and to get to the Empire Arts Theatre.

Council Member Hamerlik stated based on the supplemental information, withdrew his motion.
Council Member Glassheim moved that the recommendation be approved, seconded by Council Member Kerian.

Mr. Hanson stated they made the initial determination and sent letters to each of the three recipients, that the received a phone call from Charlie Bremseth, Listen, and he indicated that he would not be able to spend the funds this year on that specific project and were fine to bypass they this year but stated he will be putting in an application for next year, that they talked to a member of the board of Kosmos and that operation is closed; sent a letter to Habitat for Humanity and received a letter today indicating that they do protest the changing of this grant but that he still supports bypassing them for this year as they have had difficulty spending the money that was allocated to that organization for 2000 and feel better opportunity to spend those dollars in lower ranking projects, Firehall Theatre and Empire Arts Theatre.

After further discussion it was moved by Council Member Burke and seconded by Council Member Christensen to hold this request until next year’s and carry over this year’s funding. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Burke, Hamerlik, Lunak, Christensen, Brooks, Bjerke - 6; voting “nay”: Council Members Glassheim, Gershman, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Stevens - 8. Mayor Brown declared the motion defeated.

Upon call for the question on the original motion and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Glassheim, Gershman, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson, Brooks, Hamerlik - 9; voting “nay”: Council Members Burke, Lunak, Christensen, Bjerke, Stevens - 5. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried.

APPROVE REQUEST FROM SHELTER FOR HOMELESS,
INC. ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2001 ANNUAL
ACTION PLAN, SUBJECT TO 30-DAY COMMENT PERIOD

The staff report from the Office of Urban Development relating to request from Shelter for Homeless, Inc. (Northlands Rescue Mission), with recommendation to open the 30-day public comment period as of October 1, 2001 on the proposed amendment to the 2001 Annual Action Plan, to hold a public hearing on Monday, November 5, 2001, and take final action at that time.

It was moved by Council Member Brooks and seconded by Council Member Lunak that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Upon voice vote the motion carried 13 votes affirmative; Council Member Bjerke voted against the motion.

ELIMINATE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
AS OF OCTOBER 1, 2001

The staff report from the director of public works relating to matter of public transportation committee extension, with recommendation to extend the continuation of the public transportation committee to January 1, 2002.

Council Member Bjerke stated he disagreed with the fact that the city council can easily be tied by people who are not elected, now forming task forces rather than going to public transportation committee, and moved to end the public transportation committee as of tonight; the motion was seconded by Council Member Stevens.
Council Member Hamerlik stated the public transportation committee is concerned because of the two task forces and if want it to go through one more committee before it comes here, the way to do it is to extend it.

Council Member Stevens stated when discussed by council it was that they wanted to end the transportation committee and roll it into the committee of the whole and made an exception on Mr. Hamerlik’s motion that it be extended until October 1 and that Mr. Foster would have a committee of citizens that could advise him and would bring it to committee of the whole.

Council Member Burke stated the reason they have task forces on these two items is because the bus committee split evenly and couldn’t give us a recommendation on those matters and council couldn’t figure it out either, the bus committee has not given us any strong guidance and been very much divided between citizen members who represent interest relating to certain parts of the transit system and the council members who have a fiscal concern about the bus system.

Todd Feland, director of public works, stated he thought when the council was going to down-size to 7 members next year, they would presume to have an advisory committee to advise public transportation on transpiration needs whether from the disabled community, senior community or UND community, and it was his recommendation since the two task forces were out there and some things unresolved, to give them few more months to resolve the issues and give time to set up a structure before killing the committee.

Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 13 votes affirmative; Council Member Hamerlik voted against the motion.

TABLE CHANGE ORDER FOR PROJECT NO. 4901

The staff report from the engineering department relating to Change Order #2 for Project No. 4901, English Coulee Bikepath Lighting, with recommendation to approve Project No. 4901 Change Order #2 for Moorhead Electric in the amount of $3,165.00.

Al Grasser, city engineer, introduced his assistant Cindy Voigt, assistant city engineer, and the issue is time sensitive and that he would have her review the time sensitive nature of the request.

It was noted that this item did not appear on the committee of the whole agenda last week and it was moved by Council Member Christensen and seconded by Lunak to table this item. Upon voice vote the motion carried.

APPROVE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 17 AND
24, 2001

Typewritten copies of the minutes of the special city council meetings held on Monday, September 10 and 24, and of the regular meeting held on September 17, 2001, were presented and read. It was moved by Council Member Lunak and seconded by Council Member Bjerke to approve the minutes as presented. Carried 14 votes affirmative.

APPROVE BILLS AND ESTIMATES

Vendor Payment Listing No. 01-19, dated October 1, 2001 and totaling $896,115.40 and estimate summaries totaling $2,888,573.15 (Flood Estimate Summary, $930.00 and Regular Estimate Summary, $2,887,643.15) were presented and read.

It was moved by Council Member Bjerke and seconded by Council Member Kerian that these bills and estimates be allowed and that the city auditor be authorized to issue warrants in payment of the same. Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Bjerke, Stevens, Hamerlik, Burke, Glassheim, Gershman, Lunak, Christensen, Klave, Kerian, Bakken, Kreun, Martinson - 14; voting “nay”: none. Mayor Brown declared the motion carried and the bills and estimates ordered paid.

ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR COMMENTS

Rick Duquette, interim administrative coordinator, reported that last week council members received a letter from the Substance Abuse & Traffic Safety Council, that he will be meeting with their Board tomorrow morning to get more details on their request to the council.

Council Member Christensen stated that the administration is somewhat frustrated as to the direction the council is going and what should be looking for as far as an executive director of the urban development office, that it is his understanding that they have gone to market and have a number of applicants, and asked if in the process of narrowing the applicants down to three or five or seven. Mayor Brown stated that now they know that we want to go ahead and look at applicants to see who is most qualified in those areas of housing authority, urban development and economic development.

COUNCIL MEMBER MARTINSON EXCUSED

Council Member Christensen stated we have a Grand Forks Housing Authority that is rethinking whether they want to have someone as executive director of the urban development serve as the director of the Housing Authority; and that there is another issue - economic development; and apparently we have put in place the structure for the urban development office to go forward, because the person we hire can make some recommendations and changes. He stated he thinks it’s important for the mayor to appoint a task force to look into the function of urban development in light of this restructuring that has just taken place so get a better sense of what looking for because we have a serious issue as to whether or not the Grand Forks Housing Authority wants to be a stand alone agency, and now have classified employees in the city and Housing Authority is paying those people at a wage structure and staff wanted to be dealt with; and asked what the timeline is re. hiring of executive director. Mr. Duquette stated approx. 60 days, and would like to use similar model as using with the HR director, bring council persons involved in process and put together a selection path.

Council Member Burke stated with regard to Mr. Duquette’s meeting with the Transportation and Substance Abuse Council and what they might ask of us; Mr. Duquette stated they will ask the city council to move forward with request to NDDOT to fund the program again to the City, one of the issues he wishes to find out is through NDDOT if that program is going to continue in Grand Forks, and feels it will but through another agency besides the City - and will report back to the committee of the whole.

COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Glassheim stated he would like to see on the committee of the whole agenda, that he has a sense that this council is disorganized, dysfunctional, struggling and has no organization, it has deliberately disorganized itself; that he will try to get his thoughts together and more coherently explain what we’ve done to ourselves, etc. and take it from there.

2) Council Member Glassheim stated that Grand Forks is a regional center and would like to acknowledge this fact by much closer contact with our neighbors, one possibility is that there are bodies which exist which maybe should have regional representation on them - the Alerus Center is a regional center, the Growth Fund, as money comes to the Growth Fund from the region, and maybe other things where having closer alliances with the people who shop here, etc. and would like that to be placed on the committee of the whole agenda for discussion.

3) Council Member Glassheim reported that the last meeting of the Population Growth Task Force is Thursday night at the Rural Technology Center on campus and coming up with final proposals to bring back.

4) Congratulations to Council Member Kreun on the birth of twin granddaughters this weekend!

5) Council Member Burke stated he would like to see the task force go forward and perhaps Mayor can bring his thoughts on that to the committee of the whole next week; that he would like to be on that task force re. to Housing Authority and Urban Development.

6) Council Member Burke reported that in their packet a magazine comment that a city council goes electronic, and is something he is interested in is E-Government, that IS has worked on some of these things and if there is a master plan and if we can work on something along those lines; or if there are some thoughts going on, would like a presentation/memo at future committee of the whole; understands there are costs involved in doing that but that there maybe potentially greater savings and better service for citizens and would like to see how move down that road.

7) Council Member Burke stated that with regard to finding a way to urge the arts community to work better together and make better use of their funds, we have a lever as the council has voted to provide $100,000 in arts grants and suggested considering holding those funds until an umbrella arts group in the community is able to convene a summit of the organizations that might be interested in applying for those funds and come up with plan, suggestion or explanation of how they can work together and maybe save on administration or why it can’t be done; and then move ahead with releasing the funds. He stated he would like to see some change in the application form, and asked if a draft application for those programs could be sent to council members for their review.

8) Council Member Burke stated that with regard to the organizations that have received funds from this year’s events grants and have completed their programs, would like to know if any of them have requested their final 10% payment, and what documentation has been provided with regard to our requirement for release of the final 10%.

9) Council Member Hamerlik announced that the task force on night bus voted 3 to 1 to continue the night bus for a period of time, but changed the bus schedule and that changed tonight, schedule distributed and timing is out and plan is to use the trolley to reduce costs and those people that rely on the night bus are able to use it on a different schedule. He stated that the public transportation committee normally met the second Tuesday of the month and should be canceling any future meetings of the committee.

10) Council Member Brooks stated when he ran for his seat on the council one of his most important agenda items was economic development, that the City needs to look at that in terms of tax relief for citizens and future of the city. He stated we have the City of Grand Forks and the Economic Development Corporation, that we have a dysfunctional economic development, perhaps need to look at restructuring Housing Authority - that we have no economic development in this city - that organizational structure belongs to the administration and city council needs to make sure we do something about it. He stated if they put a task force together, he would like to be on that.

Council Member Gershman stated that when a council member states that there is no economic development going on in the city, that is the wrong message to put out - the Economic Development Corporation is working very hard, that he has been involved in two projects, one with the possibility of 400 to 700 jobs - another which will be 40 jobs which is a major corporation (North American Center) which is looking to expansion. He stated that they don’t ring the bell until they have the deal done, that there have been a couple companies that have relocated here from Canada and have requested that not a lot be made of that because of labor issues, etc. He stated there is a tremendous amount being done. He stated if we are going to put economic development in Urban Development then communication better start, that several items brought up to Growth Fund that Economic Development Corp. didn’t know about, need to break this down so battle lines need not be there. Federal Express expanded at the airport and City was not even notified - 40 jobs as they got a contract with the Postal Service.

11) Council Member Bakken thanked Mr. Martinson and Mr. Hamerlik for serving on the bus committee, and takes exception that they didn’t bring anything to this council - that they brought to the council to do away with night bus service, brought matter of raising rates - task forces were formed on those items; that someone didn’t like the Congressional homes project but it did a very good service for this community and got a lot of people into houses that wouldn’t have been able to afford a house in this town, long term did a good deal.

12) Council Member Kerian thanked finance department for information on the flood assessments so that they could respond to questions; and asked how it is decided how much would be by special assessment and how much by property tax. The city auditor stated it was a council decision on what they thought we could afford in the area of property tax, that they knew during that timeline the School District was going to eliminate about 10 mills off their mill levy, discussed that with them and were hoping to take that and add it to ours and apply, and that same year were able to reduce some of our operating mill levy and added 5 mills for the amount that would come from property taxes. He stated the other portion that’s coming from sales and use tax is a function of the available dollars and what we can fund with those available dollars to knock off the portion to come down to the assessment. He stated there are certain limits as a municipality that we can levy property tax and would also require vote of the public.

13) Council Member Klave stated he received a note in their packet that staff was trying to coordinate a calendar of events and meetings, and would like to see that council members are told how they can access that on their own computers so they can review that.

14) Council Member Christensen stated he had some concerns about a) how council proceeded this evening with urban development because there are other issues that weren’t addressed, and that when this task force is appointed that they have some input as to some of the issues the task force should be looking at - that it was presented tonight that they need a property manager, that JDA has some big properties and most are triple net leases and not too much management that goes on, that there are private property managers that do property management for 3 to 6% of gross revenue. b) He stated he has sat on the Growth Fund and sees lines that have been drawn, and doesn’t see cooperation that should exist, and concerned about that; c) He stated he wasn’t sure about an urban development office keeping track of the monies, that they have EDA grants and have certain sources of money, and it’s like these are my monies and don’t ask about them and when deal comes along won’t tell about the money unless have to - power play - and hopes these things get addressed because these are problems that have existed for many months, and won’t change because restructure; and would like to see these implemented within the next 90 days and would like to see review of the Code to see what changes have to be made in our city code once we get to a council of 7 so we can begin thinking about those things to address how someone is going to govern in the future..

15) Council Member Christensen stated that at one time Mr. Swanson put together a list of the committees that we have and the committees that are appointed by the mayor, with or without council confirmation, and perhaps need to have that updated, so have information as to committees and members, terms and expiration of terms. He stated that the Knight Foundation’s report was that we have burned out leadership in this community, and if have idea of committees that are available, appointees that serve and potential to get new people involved in leadership and would be something this council could do that would be functional, and encourage some people to sit in positions of leadership so that there will be a future crop of leaders to address some of the issues before the community.

16) Council Member Christensen stated we are beginning the budget process in October and would like ideas from staff as to where staff would recommend that services be cut or personnel be cut, or that fees be raised or money moved around from enterprise funds so that we aren’t going to be forced to address an issue of mill increases; and important because empowered our staff to assist us with this that we get input because that will engender, entail, develop public debate; there should be issues that we address and focus on and have hearings on or let the people know what we are working on.

17) Council Member Christensen stated he was curious how a task force could implement a change in bus routes and implement a change in the type of bus that services the route and not sure if there was a fee increase and thought that would be a council function - and task force come back with a report for vote. Council Member Bjerke reported that the routes can be changed administratively if it’s a very small change (and it was a small change); the bus could be changed administratively and that was done; and as far as extending it an extra 30 days that will be at the committee of the whole meeting on the 8th as the council has to vote to continue funding - that they only did was allowed to do administratively, and council will have a chance to vote on whether or not you want to extend the night bus service for the next 30 days to evaluate the new route. Council Member Hamerlik reported there were no rate increases at this time as that is a separate task force.

18) Council Member Lunak stated he would like to serve on the task force re. urban development and Housing Authority.

19) Mayor Brown made several announcements:
a) on item 6-1 a change order item that was time sensitive and voted to table without finding out why it was time sensitive;
b) the Tour de Fourches which is Saturday, October 6, pink ribbon fund raiser for breast cancer awareness, starts at Optimist Park, registration at 8:00 a.m., riders begin at 9:00 a.m. - three courses (5 mile, 10 mile, 27 mile rides), each rider required to wear a helmet and the Safe Kids Coalition will be selling helmets at a reduced price - registration fees $20 after September 28 and will include highlights in Grand Forks;
c) this is Dr. Dean K. Midboe Day who has retired and the community will miss him and we are grateful for his 30 years of service;
d) the Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Grand Forks and would like to comment CVIC for what they do in our community;
e) congratulations to EERC for being in our community for 50 years, been a wonderful partner in building and rebuilding Grand Forks, and with their looking at the waffle plan, hope they will be a key player in finding ways that we won’t have to rebuild again;
f) he reminded everyone of our Spaghetti Feed tomorrow from 4:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the Alerus Center and hope to feed 4,000 to 6,000 people - good will donation and would like to make an annual community event if we get a good response to this - will have Sweet Adeline’s, Dick King and Fallcreek Barbershop Quartet, and all funds will be donated to the New York Fire 911 Fund, and many of these items have been donated for this occasion - Please attend and show your support;
g) the Chamber of Commerce encourages him to have people check their web sites for Dave Barry sitings because many reported.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Kreun and seconded by Council Member Lunak that we do now adjourn. Carried 13 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,

John M. Schmisek
City Auditor

Approved:
__________________________________
Michael R. Brown, Mayor