Print VersionStay Informed
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA
November 11, 1999

The city council of the city of Grand Forks, North Dakota met in special session in the council chambers in City Hall on Thursday, November 11, 1999 at the hour of 7:00 o’clock p.m. with Mayor Owens presiding. pursuant to call by Mayor Owens which was served on all members on November 8, 1999: Document No. 7901- Notice.

Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner 12; absent: Council Members Klave, Martinson - 2.

CONSIDER MATTER OF GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE

The city auditor read the six reports and it was moved by Council Member Babinchak and seconded by Council Member Bakken to consider each item separately. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review Committee, and recommended that the council request the city attorney to draft an ordinance establishing a three-member standing committee on committees to be elected every two years by council, whose purpose would be to review all committees established by council.

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

Council Member Glassheim stated that in the Government Structure Review Committee there was some concern that we had too many committees, that council people were on committees they didn’t need to be on, that we could reduce them, and combine some smaller committees into the full scale permanent committees, and somebody has to recommend to the council the elimination of committees, etc. and that this might be a committee that might meet two or three times once a year and review the committees that exist and recommend changes to council. Council Member Babinchak suggested that this be one of the responsibilities of the committee chairs rather than creating another committee. Council Member Carpenter stated that the recommendation is a mechanism for making sure that periodically committees get reviewed and that some recommendations come back.

Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review Committee, and recommended to eliminate administrative matters not needing council approval from council or committee agendas be reported back from standing committees to council by the first meeting in December.

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

It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Glassheim to amend the motion to change the date to January 15, 2000. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the question on the motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review committee, and recommended that the council request the Info Center to investigate televising of council meetings and report preliminary findings to council at the first meeting in December.

It was moved by Council Member Polovitz and seconded by Council member Bayer that this recommendation be and is hereby approved. Carried 12 votes affirmatives.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review Committee, and recommended that the council president appoint a task force of three council members to work with a like number of department head representatives and the mayor to develop a written document defining the roles of the mayor, department heads, and the council; that the task force make a preliminary report to council before the end of January 2000; and that the council have at least one retreat with the mayor and department heads to discuss roles and responsibilities prior to the preliminary report.

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

It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Babinchak to amend the motion to change the date to March 1, 2000. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the question on the motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review Committee, and recommended that the council request the mayor’s assistant to prepare an orientation session for newly elected or appointed officials to define roles, responsibilities and mechanics, to be used after the June election.

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

It was moved by Council Member Hafner and seconded by Council Member Bouley that the motion be amended to require council members to attend the orientation session.

Mr. Swanson, city attorney, stated it may be a noble gesture but wouldn’t be a basis for disqualification in assuming the position, provided that the council is aware of that, it wouldn’t be improper to pass a motion, but not much teeth in enforcing it.

Upon call for the question on the amendment, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.
It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Carpenter to amend the motion that the orientation session would be held within a month of the swearing into office. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the question on the motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development Committee, reported having considered the matter of recommendations of Governmental Structure Review Committee, and recommended that council request the mayor to appoint staff to work with council in developing a strategic departmental and municipal goal statement, work program, and mechanism to monitor performance on an annual basis.

It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Polovitz that this recommendation be and are hereby approved. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

CONSIDER SIZE OF CITY COUNCIL

The city auditor read the five reports relative to the size of the council which were considered by the Urban Development Committee.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter of government structure, size of council, and recommended to place the Home Rule Charter amendment on the special election in February 2000.

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

The city attorney reported that an amendment to the Home Rule Charter does not allow the City to adopt a form of government other than what Statutes allow. He stated there was no provision to elect members of the city council at large as opposed to wards as there is no provision in State law and could only do that if the Home Rule Charter allowed you to do that and may be provision they may wish to include. He stated that a second provision would be to adopt a form of government not presently established by Statute, but that an amendment to the Home Rule Charter, if it passes, does not eliminate the requirement for a public vote on any subsequent consideration of an amendment of the form of government, and that requirement of public vote already exists in the Home Rule Charter.

Mr. Swanson stated that provided that they continue to elect members of the city council by ward there would be no need to act upon the HRC amendment, this does not implement anything but only gives the council the ability to at a later date put into place for consideration an alternative form of government or alternative form of election of members. He stated if only interested in doing a change in the number of council members and continue to elect by wards do not need HRC amendment, but if at any time in the future you wish to allow the public to consider the possibility of an election of members at large or the consideration of a possible form of government not presently prescribed by Statute cannot do that without an amendment to HRC. He stated that as long as electing by wards don’t need the amendment, that this doesn’t enact additional power but gives you the ability to consider something different or more flexible at a future date.

Mr. Swanson stated that both by State law and local law must declare date and times of election; and need a minimum of sixty (60) days for publication for Home Rule Charter amendment before them. Mr. Swanson stated if they intend to call for a special election would need to identify date and times of election and generally identify the topics to be voted upon. Council Member Beyer suggested they could hold this motion and do this under item #5. Mr. Swanson stated that the second report would also have to be held.

Doug Christensen stated that there is some confusion as to the necessity for that being placed on the ballot for a special election; that they are only cleaning up the HRC so a future body could adopt a resolution for election at large. He stated that perhaps this isn’t needed right now because if confusion by council it will probably confuse the electorate and could be brought to the electorate for vote at another election. He stated that the biggest issue that the electorate should be asked up or down - to go with a 7 person or an 8 person council and only need two issues on the ballot.

Joanne Gabrynowicz , 1323 Noble Cove, questioned ballot and spoke in favor of the ballot re. Home Rule Charter.

Upon call for the question on the floor for the amendment of the Home Rule Charter the motion carried 11 votes; Council Member Lunak voted against the motion.

#2) Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter and recommended that in the special election the ballot language reflect that we want four wards with two representatives per ward to go into effect at the June 2002 election. It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Polovitz that this recommendation be and is hereby approved.

Council Member Glassheim moved to amend the motion for four wards with two representatives to five wards with two representatives. Council Member Babinchak seconded the motion.

Mr. Swanson stated that the ward boundaries would have to be determined at a later date based upon population analysis, wards must be proportionately equivalent and requires some analysis of whatever data is available, typically obtained from the Census Bureau, could identify the number of wards you desire to be considered.

Mr. Swanson stated that the statute seems to suggest - the governing body of the City shall submit the question of increasing or decreasing the number of members of the city governing body to the electors. He stated that translates into some type of general question as a preliminary question to be should the membership of the Grand Forks City Council be reduced from its present 14 members, yes or no; and then move into your menu of what numbers you are looking at; that to not have some indication as to a desire to change the council, doesn’t know if able to interpret the election results once tabulated; need some threshold question with regard to the change in council membership.

Mike Polovitz asked if the public wants a change in membership, only way of going down is by everyone voting no. Mr. Swanson stated that unless threshold question the public by voting on it would only defeat the change if everything voted down. Council Member Hafner suggested that they should have choice of 14, 10 or 7 and have voters tell them what they want.

Upon call for the question and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye”: Council Members Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Hamerlik - 8; voting “nay”: Council Members Lunak, Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke - 4. Mayor Owens declared the amendment carried.

Mr. Swanson stated this doesn’t identify the manner in which you would treat the year 2000 election if this were to pass or how you would establish the terms for those elected in the 2002 election; and if do not prescribe a specific manner in the year 2002 election, those individuals appearing on the ballot with the most votes would be elected to the longest term, those receiving the second most votes would have the shorter term, or can specifically identify those positions as a four-year term and a two-year term and file for whichever term you are interested in doing, but that he is concerned if this were to pass how you intend to treat the year 2000 election, and would need to address that contained within the motion.

Council Member Beyer moved that the June 2000 election there would be 7 seats for two year terms. Council Member Hamerlik seconded the motion.

Mr. Swanson stated that if in February any of the alternatives pass, then when you call for the election for June of 2000 the term would be identified pursuant to the February election; and need to identify here what you would do with the year 2000 election should any of these proposals pass. Mr. Swanson stated that they could rule as a matter of law that if you were silent as to the year 2000 election, that the term ends in two years upon the effective date of this; however, to be clear on the point both to electorate and to any potential members that might be running in year 2000, including it in the ballot is the only way to go. He stated they need to identify how you are handling the terms present and future in the event it passes and be contained within item voting upon.

Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Council Member Beyer moved an amendment that if this passes and the council size is reduced that the top vote getters have the four-year terms. Mr. Swanson stated that the Statute would presume that is what is going to occur unless you choose to do something different. Council Member Beyer withdrew her amendment.

Council Member Carpenter moved an amendment to have one seat in each ward for a four-year term and one seat up for a two-year term so have defined races. Council Member Hamerlik seconded the amendment.

Upon call for the question on the amendment and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Mr. Swanson stated the council can fashion the ballot, that he had anticipated a threshold question as to whether membership should be changed or reduced, and if yes, go to terms. He stated they need to be aware that if they have three options they could end up in a situation with all three with equal one-thirds.

Upon call for the question on the original motion, as amended, (that in the special election the ballot language reflect that we want four wards with two reps. per ward to go into effect at the June 2002 election, and amendment passed to go with five wards with 2 representatives; and in June 2000 that the election have 7 seats with two year terms and another amendment with one seat for four years and one seat for two years, and 2002 was the last one).

Ross Wylot, participant member of the Govt. Structure Review Comm., stated that one thing that disturbed him was that after final findings was that there was a certain amount of nay-saying re. findings, what the committee came down to, was very tough issue to come to the number of council people they wanted to put forth as a recommendation, and that committee set up where everyone was very open-minded and listened to everybody and still had strong ideas of what they thought at the end and was why vote went down to the wire. He thought that the issue of reduction is looked at by some council members as punishment for not performing well or as a disclaimer that they’re not happy, and that’s not the perception of the majority of people in the city; that what the people of Grand Forks want to know is that they are listened to and given a choice an opportunity to have a say in how their government is structured, and ask people for number of members.

Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Brooks, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim, Carpenter, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner - 9; voting “nay”: Council Members Lucke, Lunak, Polovitz - 3. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried.
#3) Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter and recommended that a second proposal be placed on the February 2000 ballot that we have seven wards with one representative per ward to go into effect at the June 2002 election.

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

Council Member Carpenter moved an amendment that for the June 2000 that those 7 terms be for a two-year period of time and that in the 2002 election that wards 1 through 4 be for four-year terms and wards 5 through 7 be for two year terms. Council Member Beyer seconded the motion. Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Upon call for the question on the original motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

Council Member Hamerlik moved a motion to place on the agenda the opportunity for a vote whether or not 14 member council remain. Council Member Bouley seconded the motion.

Council Member Hamerlik stated that the people be given the opportunity to vote whether or not they want to continue with a 14-member council; if yes, ballot so constructed that they no longer need to vote any further; if no, then have an option that they just passed, the 10 or the 7, and it is possible that the ballot be constructed to be an advisory vote.

After some discussion and upon roll call vote, the following voted “aye” Council Members Bakken, Hafner, Hamerlik, Bouley - 4; voting “nay”: Council Members Glassheim, Carpenter, Lunak, Beyer, Babinchak, Brooks, Polovitz, Lucke - 8. Mayor Owens declared the motion defeated.

#4) Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported that we ask the city attorney to review these propositions and draft language to realize these propositions and return them to the Urban Development committee for review.

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

Mr. Swanson stated that in light of the action the council has taken it may be appropriate to amend that provision to direct the city attorney to draft the ballot language and return to Urban Development Committee. Council Member Beyer moved that this motion with the amendment that the subsequent vote between 10 or 7 has to have a majority over 50% of the total voters. Mr. Swanson stated he would prefer that they give him direction on what type of language that you want on the ballot and when you get the ballot to make your decisions on that - that the motion would be amended to direct city attorney to draft ballot language including language requiring a majority vote; and that will come back to the Urban Development Committee and to the council for future consideration. Council Member Glassheim seconded the motion.

Upon call for the question and upon voice vote, the motion carried 11 votes affirmative; Council Member Lunak voted against the motion.

Upon call for the question on the original motion, as amended, and upon voice vote, the motion carried 12 votes affirmative.

#5) Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered this matter and recommended to call for a special election in February 2000.

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

Mr. Swanson stated that if wait to December 6 meeting, you would not have adequate time to have the ballot to the newspaper and publish and still have 60 days to meet a February election - either February 15th or the 22nd.

Council Member Carpenter moved to table this item to December 6 meeting; Council Member Babinchak seconded the motion. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

CONSIDER MATTER OF GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE -
ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR

The city auditor read the three reports relative to administrative coordinator which were considered by the Urban Development Committee.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter of government structure: administrative coordinator; and recommended that the City have an administrative coordinator position established by January 1, 2000.

It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Glassheim that this recommendation be approved.

It was moved by Council Member Brooks and seconded by Council Member Lunak to amend that the position be established by January 1, 2000 on the condition that we have identified budget and where dollars will come from. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

It was moved by Council Member Hamerlik and seconded by Council Member Lunak that this be a contracted position. Carried 12 votes affirmative.
There were some questions as to the authority that this position would have; Council Member Glassheim stated that in job description language, reporting to means authority over, and that all the department heads would report to and be under the authority of, this position, and this position would report and be under the authority of the mayor, and mayor would be the final authority on the administration of the city, that council may oppose this, but clarification is that report to means under the authority of the person to whom you report. Council Member Carpenter stated that we have a part-time mayor which is what we have established, and that there are plenty of functions for a mayor to be doing, dealing with long term, communicating to the community, addressing solutions and staying away from a direct day to day, that the mayor will still have responsibilities for day to day and those issues can be brought to them at appropriate times but this person would have authority and would be responsible for taking care most of the day to day and free the mayor from those things, and we are a large complex organization; and thinks this is appropriate and long overdue.

Robert Kweit, 3823 Fairview Drive, stated when they have a city manager form of government, the city council hires and fires the city manager and that person is responsible to the members of the city council, that with this system we recommended to keep things as they were but to give the mayor an administrative assistant for basically the reasons presented by Council Member Carpenter; that we have a part-time mayor who is out of town oftentimes who is representing the City doing public relations, setting direction and that somebody should be managing the day to day operations, but should be under the mayor.

Mayor Owens reviewed a memo that had been placed on council members desks and reviewed how she would like to proceed. She stated that she had a tremendous amount of response from the public about putting that into effect without having a budget in place, and looking at the total structure of government and downsizing the employees that we’ve had since the flood. She stated that a job description that would be in place by January 1, 2000 through Human Resources; that they have the current assistant to the mayor and would like him to take a temporary leave from that position, maintaining his Civil Service protection, and assume the position of administrative coordinator on an interim or temporary basis; and position would be located in the Mayor’s Office until the results of the six-months evaluation by the governing restructuring committee and the mayor are presented no later than August 1, 2000. She stated this would be a professional position whose responsibilities would go far beyond 8:00 to 5:00. She stated that during the trial time only the assistant to the mayor position would remain vacant; that the assistant to the mayor position is necessary and has no authorized powers. She stated that after the evaluation period the mayor, with concurrence of the city council, will appoint an administrative coordinator to a four-year term as a contract employee, and the current assistant to the mayor maybe appointed as admistrative coordinator after evaluation or may return to the position of assistant to the mayor. She stated that the assistant to the mayor position would be filled after the evaluation period of the administrative coordinator if that person was hired to assist the mayor in his/her duties at the current job description.

After some discussion Council Member Glassheim stated that the motion on the floor is to adopt the position by January 1, 2000; and moved the Mayor’s items 2 through 5 as an amendment to the motion as methodology for proceeding with it. Motion died for lack of a second.

It was noted that there has been a reclassification for the position of assistant to the mayor which has not been authorized by the council and against the intent of the original position of the council as to how job descriptions need to be changed before there are reclassifications; but there is no change in job description.

Upon call for the question, as amended, and upon roll call the following voted “aye”; Council Members Carpenter, Lunak, Beyer, Babinchak, Hafner, Brooks, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Glassheim - 10; voting “nay” Council Members Bakken, Polovitz - 2. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter of government structure - administrative coordinator: and recommended that administrative coordinator position be located physically and symbolically outside the Mayor’s Office.

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

Upon roll call the following voted “aye”: Council Members Lunak, Beyer, Babinchak, Bakken, Hafner, Lucke, Hamerlik, Bouley, Carpenter - 9; voting “nay”: Council Members Brooks, Polovitz, Glassheim. - 3. Mayor Owens declared the motion carried.

Committee No. 4, Urban Development, reported having considered the matter of government structure - administrative coordinator, and recommended that we adopt the recommendations of the Government Structure Review Committee concerning the administrative officer position: Document No. 7902 - Recommendations.

It was moved by Council Member Beyer and seconded by Council Member Glassheim that this recommendation be approved.

It was moved by Council Member Glassheim to make a substitute motion for all the items in the listing which is are essentially similar but cleared than and moved that the bullet points on sheet entitled “Proposed Substitute Motion Eliot Glassheim November 11, 1999” except the one by contract which has already been passed, be substituted for this item.

It was moved by Council Member Hafner and Council Member Lunak to table this motion to Monday night (November 15, 1999). Upon voice vote the motion carried.

ADJOURN

It was moved by Council Member Lunak and seconded by Council Member Hamerlik that we do now adjourn. Carried 12 votes affirmative.

Respectfully submitted,



John M. Schmisek
City Auditor

Approved:
_______________________________________
Patricia A. Owens, Mayor