City of Grand Forks, North Dakota

Employment - City Directory - Contact Us

Minutes of the Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the Whole
Monday, August 14, 2006 - 7:00 p.m.__________________________

The city council met as the Committee of the Whole on Monday, August 14, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers in City Hall with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, Glassheim, Gershman, Christensen, Bakken, Kreun - 6; absent: Council Member McNamara - 1.

Mayor Brown announced that when addressing the committee to please come forward to use the microphone for the record, and advised that the meeting is being televised live and taped for later broadcast.

Mayor Brown commented on various events held during the past week and upcoming events:
Congratulations to people who organized Catfish Days, great event for our community and combined with Farmers Market had a great turnout downtown from people all around the region. The chili feed was one of the highlights and the Pirates of the Red, the Mayor's team, placed in the top 10 as No. 10 and won the showmanship the second year in a row and narrowly edged out Mayor Stauss' chili. Thanked the Chamber for the work they did and also all the organizers and volunteers.

Council Member Kreun reported that today he had the opportunity to represent Grand Forks on a flood protection information gathering by the Mississippi River Commission,; that we gave a presentation of the things that went right with our flood protection project and things that we could do better, they were very attentive and asked pertinent questions. These people represent 41% of all the water that is discharged in the U.S. in a waterway system through the Mississippi River; and that several of them are going to Louisiana and questions they asked were very pointed and pertinent. He stated that Grand Forks is becoming known as one of the best run projects and better project that have turned out to be design-wise and works the way it is supposed to. He stated this is the second group that has come to Grand Forks to look at our project between Grand Forks and East Grand Forks to find out ways that they can bring our do's and don'ts to the next project; the next one they are going to be involved with is in Louisiana, New Orleans, and that they were very impressed. He stated they are going away with some of the things that Grand Forks has done and they appreciated the work that we did and we appreciate the cooperation we have had with the Corps of Engineers and FEMA, and our state legislative people and federal legislative people.

Mayor Brown stated that the Director of the U.S. Census Bureau was in town, Director Charles Kincannon and he met with our city staff and officials today.

Council Member Gershman reported this was a very productive meeting, Mr. Kincannon was here along with representatives from the Governor's Office. The population in Grand Forks had been estimated in 2005 to be 49,792, that many felt that was too low and they revised the estimate from the Census Bureau to 50,303, and that is fairly significant as when go over 50,000 that it means certain things in various departments. Mr. Kincannon pledged that his office, the U.S. Census Bureau, will work with Grand Forks each year to verify the numbers based upon information that we can bring to them. He stated an example of information that they didn't have that we will be getting to them, that since 1997 Grand Forks has constructed single family, townhouses and multi-family units, 2,762, and if translate that into the average that is used per household, that is 2.23 and comes out to 6,159 residents. He stated we think our population is higher than 50,303 and the Census Bureau is going to work with us to come up with additional numbers, very productive meeting. He stated Mr. Duquette handled the City's business extremely well and did a very good job on presenting our case, and can potentially mean millions of dollars to the city of Grand Forks.

Mayor Brown thanked Mr. Duquette and the Governor's Office for helping set up this meeting.

2.1 Tax increment exemption, Riverview Apartments, North 3rd Street and 1st Avenue North._____________________________________________________ Gershman asked if the agreement we have with Riverview Apts. included tax increment
financing, and questioned the fact that we offered them a five-year tax abatement but the State
only allows us to have 3 years. Mr. Hoover stated they went for 5 years but based on basis on
which we can do this, can only get 3 years and they will use that increment that they would have
paid in taxes to get a loan and will pay the loan off with that incremental tax. Christensen asked
if they have a tax abatement on the project and if so for how long. Mr. Hoover stated that when
they set up the 5-year it had an estimated value of $175,000 a year, and as this one turned out
because of the basis to get the full value as close to that $175,000, we have to go for 3 years at
$169,000. Christensen stated that rather than pay the taxes to the City, we allow them to use the
tax they would have paid to amortize the loan; and that is the only tax break they get as far as real
estate taxes on this project, so at the end of 3 years or 4 years they start paying full taxes. Hoover
and Mel Carsen stated that is correct.

Brooks stated the Renaissance Zone that was created downtown and if this is a part of that
renaissance zone and that they receive tax credit from the State and City. Hoover stated no, this
is straight tax abatement because we can't do both because abating taxes on one hand and can't
give them property tax relief. Christensen stated that at the end of 3 years they are on roles 100%
and that portion of the renaissance zone that would apply is the developer has an exemption from
State tax as to the income earned from the project, but that is in every renaissance zone project.
Hoover stated that is correct but that they have not applied for the renaissance zone.

2.2 Authorize the call for bids and set sale date for $1,465,000 General Obligation Public Building Bonds, Series 2006B.___________________
2.3 Authorize the call for bids and set sale date for $7,320,000 Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series 2006C.____________________________

Brenda Krueger, Springsted, Inc., reported on these two items, the series of bond Issues

that the City expects to issue next month. The first series is the General Obligation Public Building Bonds, Series 2006B; and the second series of bonds is the $7,320,000 Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series 2006C. She stated that next week they will be asked to adopt resolutions authorizing the sale of these two series of bonds.

She stated the proceeds of the Public Building Bonds will be used to finance various public building projects - the North Columbia Road fire hall, a remodeling of the police building and some municipal court projects. The last time the City issued this type of debt for a new building project was in 1991 for this particular building; the bonds issued for this facility were refunded once and will be maturing after next year. There were special statutory requirements for issuing public building bonds and all of the legal steps required to date have been taken, and bond counsel has stated that the building projects are allowable under the statute; bonds will be amortized or paid off over a period of 19 years.

The second series of bonds are typically done on a regular basis, a refunding improvement bond, and will be used to finance various street paving projects, street lighting, sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer projects throughout the city, they will be repaid fully from special assessment against benefited properties over a period of 21 years, the assessments that will be repaid by these bonds will be filed this year and next year and assessment range anywhere from 10, 15 or 20 years. As part of the bond issue process they will apply for a rating from Moody's Investors Service, and are proud that the City has been able to maintain their Double A3 rating, which is an excellent rating.

2.4 Resolution calling General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1997D.
There were no comments.

2.5 Budget amendment for Defined Benefit Pension.

There were no comments.

2.6 Various code changes to amend license and permit fees.

Gershman stated that the city council decided to begin to increase fees to the cost of the

consumer price index each year because fees and licenses were not raised in the city for up to 12-15 years and that when making an adjustment it was a big adjustment, and now are going to do that gradually at the cost of living increase yearly.

2.7 Amendment No. 1 to Utility Relocation agreement for Project No. 5674, Columbia Road and 24th Ave.S. Intersection Reconstruction__________

There were no comments.

2.8 Create special assessment district for Project No. 6039, Dist. 295, watermain on N. 48th St. (1600 - 1800 Blocks).____________________________________

There were no comments.

2.9 Plans and specifications for Project No. 6023, Dist. 451, sanitary sewer for Columbia Park 32nd Addn.________________________________________

There were no comments.

2.10 Plans and specifications for Project No. 6024, Dist. 294, watermain for Columbia Park 32nd Addn.____________________________________

There were no comments.

2.11 Plans and specifications for Project No. 6025, Dist. 452, storm sewer for Columbia Park 32nd Addn._______________________________________

There were no comments.

2.12 Request from William and Tina Eiseman for approval of a variance to the subdivision regulations for Lots 16, 17 and 18, Blk. 65, Alexander and Ives Addn. for the purpose of varying the access restriction requirement for a collector street (loc. at 1518 8th Ave.N.).______________________________

There were no comments.

2.13 Request from MDI Limited Partnership #110 for a determination as to whether or not the property described below is suitable for commercial development (multiple-family structure) and that the site conforms to the permitted land uses within the Central Business District, and that the proposed commercial development is in conformity with the City's 2035 Land Use Plan as a whole and that the proposed project and location are appropriate for the approval of the creation of an Urban Renewal District Boundary for the purposes of establishing a TIF (Tax Increment Financing) project. (Frt. 150 ft. of Lots 1 and 2, Blk. 24, Original Townsite, and to include Lot A of the Replat of Lots 3 and 4, Blk. 24, Original Townsite, to further include additional lands adjacent thereto.)_____________________

There were no comments.

2.14 Request from Diamond E. Pipiles on behalf of Nancy Pipiles for approval of a variance to the subdivision regulations for the west 57 ft. (rear) of Lot 11, Blk. 18, Original Townsite, for the purpose of varying the access onto a minor arterial street (loc. at 514 University Ave.)_______________________

There were no comments.

2.15 Request from Planning Department on behalf of the City of Grand Forks, ND for preliminary approval of an ordinance to amend the text of the Land Development Code, Chapter XVIII of the Grand Forks City Code of 1987, as amended, amending Article 2, Zoning; Section 18-0204 Rules and Definitions relating to ground monument signs, shopping center ground monument signs, and unified shopping centers and Section 18-0301 Signs.____________ There were no comments.

3. INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Portfolio Management/Summary as of July 31, 2006.

Information only. - No comments.

4, CITIZEN REQUEST

Carol Kelley, 110 8th Avenue South, Board Member of Prairie Harvest Human Services Foundation that provides services to the seriously mentally ill in our community, that she recently received letter from the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill that grades our state as F in providing services for this population, that in Grand Forks Prairie Harvest Human Services Foundation is doing a fantastic job of trying their best to provide housing, medication management, job shadowing and training to this population and was upset when she heard that the monies for non-profit entities might be redirected towards infrastructure in the north end of town, that a lot of their people cannot afford to have homes and would not be served by infrastructure paid by those monies.
She stated another thing that upset her was in her neighborhood re. use of infrastructure monies - that in the last month there has been a crew of 3 to 4 or 5 people that have come to dig and frame in ramps at corners of streets, that crews came 3 times to dig and reframe that corner before it was finally poured over a period of 10 days or 2 weeks. Kreun reported that the contractor doing construction of ramps had bid the project and these are not city workers, that the City pays only once no matter how many times reframed.

Ms. Kelley stated she is concerned about their seriously mentally ill population and the fact that Prairie Harvest also provides services for troubled teens in our community and are in the process of planning new buildings, and asked for reconsideration of this issue.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS

1) Council Member Brooks reported that last week he attended the helicopter training graduation, second class, of the West Point cadets and ROTC people, great to see them and support they get, and tremendous program from the University of North Dakota.

He noted that on Saturday he was privileged to sample the chili as a judge, tough decision making.

2) Council Member Glassheim stated preliminary action the council took last week re. CDBG funds and seems the action they took weakens the nonprofits who employ and serve some 3,000+ peoples in town, creates division and ill-will throughout the community, weakens the fact of citizen participation. It also by deciding in advance what projects the city council members like, you eliminate the new ideas that come from nonprofits who are competing to make their case for the projects they think are important; and hopes over the next few weeks will rethink the position earlier discussed.

3) Council Member Christensen asked status on estimates on Riverside Pool, that they put together a budget and asked to have some information, and hopes get it back within 30 days.
He stated he would like to begin scheduling regular meetings of the finance/development committee because we have many issues that we have to address for the next 6 to 9 months.
He would appreciate an update from Urban Development Office as to the potential development on the third area of development on University Avenue, should pursue and finalize that - another apartment project and appears off to a good start on downtown housing.
He stated on issue re. nonprofits, and reported out of their committee that they would wait for a year before start talking about reallocation of CDBG funds. In the GF Herald there was a suggestion that it was disrupting the nonprofits budgets for 2007, that is not correct because none of the money had been allocated, that there is a process where money is set aside and then applications are made - for Bricks and Mortar an x number of dollars set aside and various nonprofits present programs as to why they want monies to enhance their structure, has nothing to do with programs or meeting the needs of the constituents they serve other than they then have their money for the project rather than using other monies for the project. Another portion of the money that is allocated to the United Way who takes 10% for administration and they allocate balance among the various entities that make application for income from United Way for various programs; that a recommendation that was made for the council to review as part of the budgeting process. The purpose is to begin discussions to see if there should be a shift of allocation of funds and may turn out that there won't be a shift of the allocation of funds or a gradual shifting. Some of the council members brought something forth and will engage in the conversation, nothing might happen and might go on next year as this year. He stated, lets keep a level head about this conversation and lets be respectful in the debate and listen to everybody's ideas.

4) Council Member Bakken stated sometimes have a difference of opinion and doesn't mean that what is being done isn't good, look at different ways of funding it; and looking at a different way doesn't mean money goes away but comes from different places.

5) Council Member Gershman stated his crew from Happy Harry's placed #9 in the chili contest and got the people's choice award, and they did a nice job.
He stated that the garbage cans that were on the light poles and not that many there now, not sure what happened to them, but when get more people downtown might want to look at that.
He stated that just about every night he rides the greenway, and if someone were to have an accident wouldn't know where you are and suggested that the City put up street signs that would say greenway, but also adjacent avenue so there would be a series of north and south so if something happened to someone they could get the help and tell them where they were.
Riverside Pool - There is an article in today's New York Times about WPA pools, that they were built for generations, not built for one generation and an article about the importance of them architecturally and to the nation, and is interested in getting information.
Nonprofits - That he wanted to clear up something that was misunderstood, that when he spoke about consolidation, was not saying that all of the nonprofits should come together under one roof, that is unrealistic, but it was reported and understood differently and would prefer that the time be spent seeing how it can be done and not how it can't be done and to see if they can do that because there are limited resources, we have a problem that we don't have enough money and the nonprofits have that very same problem so how they can work together over time because this could be a multi-year project to see who could come together and that is what he suggested, but that he thinks with an honest effort not to worry so much about losing identity but to save the money and is a conversation that he thinks we should have.- that as far as the money goes he is going to keep an open mind and review minutes, etc. and will have a good conversation but appreciates what Mr. Christensen said, civility in this discussion would be much appreciated.

ADJOURN

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

Respectfully submitted,

John M. Schmisek
City Auditor