Print VersionStay Informed
Minutes of Grand Forks City Council/Committee of the
Whole - Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 7:00 p.m.___________

The city council of the city of Grand Forks sitting as the Committee of the Whole met in the council chambers in City Hall on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. President Gershman presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, McNamara, Glassheim, Christensen, Kreun, Gershman - 6; absent: Council Member Bakken - 1.

President Gershman commented on various events during the past week and upcoming events:
He announced two neighborhood meetings this week:
Reeves Drive traffic concerns between 8th and 9th as lot of parking and difficult to get through on Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall, Room A101.
Skate Park proposal to locate skate park on 1st Avenue South near Police Department on May 30 at 7:00 p.m. in the Police Building.

PRESENT ALEXANDER GRIGGS HISTORIC
PRESERVATION AWARD

President Gershman presented the Alexander Griggs Historic Preservation Award to Curt Siewert posthumously, that this award recognizes exceptional personal efforts to preserve Grand Forks' built and cultural history, named for Capt. Alexander Griggs founding father of the city of Grand Forks, recipient's names are added to the permanent plaque that hangs in the council chambers, and that this is an award that is not given every year but is an award that is quite special for the City of Grand Forks and those that receive it have to put in lot of time and love for our city.

President Gershman read the proclamation for Curt Siewert and presented the proclamation to Mr. Siewert's family.

2.1 Applications for exemption of remodeling improvements to residential buildings at various locations__________________________________ _______________________
There were no comments.

2.2 Consideration of bids for Project No. 5724, Grand Forks Public Safety Center
Council Member McNamara asked for review of way they intend to pay for the facility,
cost of construction. The city auditor stated this project started couple years ago as public safety
training facility but not to the magnitude that it is today; that they came up with combination of
the two into one site:
$1.2 million - total cost of basic parts of construction of the mosquito control facility
($925,000 building and $275,000 for paving and other infrastructure);
$3.411 million - public safety facility (police and fire training facility with training
offices, support space, apparatus and response space, actual fire station in
Industrial Park area, and accompanying training facilities).
$1.16 million - site work and infrastructure for the public safety building (parking, paving,
underground work).

He stated the $1.16 million will come from cash in the infrastructure fund, 2169. The other
portions of the building, both mosquito control and the public safety training facility, are bond
issues with funding of the $3.411 million from a G.O. mill levy for Public Building Funds (they
have had in that Fund for this year and 2007, $227,700 bond payments for the City Hall addition
in 1993 that matures and paid off and that payments on this issue are going to be slightly larger
than the $227,000, will be at about $269,000 to $270,000 per year, the current mill levy in the
is 3.09 mills, and will have to go to 3.2 mills in 2009 to fund the public safety portion of it. The
mosquito control facility will be funded out of mosquito control fees, presently they pay about
$30,000+ a year in a lease payment for the structure they are in and they will fund the debt for
this facility at approx. $102,000 or $105,000 range for the duration of the revenue bonds, that last
year Mr. Shields brought in info. adding sq. footage that they weren't collecting the fee and
because of that will not have to increase the fee.

Mr. McNamara reviewed the sources of construction costs which are 100% funded, and that any
modifications to that are not going to be laid into the property tax, and it was stated that was so..

He asked for info. re. the operational costs associated with the facility. Department heads stated
that on-going operational costs for utilities, etc. out of General Fund budget for utilities, city-wide
out of the total budget, and have estimates of $180,000; that Mosquito Control will share in that
cost with money they are currently paying for utilities in their leased building; fire department
personnel will be doing cutting of grass, removing snow and doing upkeep within the station.
McNamara sated operational funds would be General Fund, and it was so noted and would do
within the constraints of the current budget will means they will have to find that money to
operate.

Mr. Shields stated they have a lease for their present facility of $21,000 and property taxes in
addition to that and with combined fees they are paying about $41,000; that in terms of
operation and maintenance they are paying approx. $10,000 out of Fund 2160.

Council Member Christensen raised number of questions re. need for the facility; that they are
building a $5.7 million facility that got legs when trying to build a $450,000 facility for mosquito
control, not sure of need for that magnitude, moving 4 fire persons over there and have to find an
additional $180,000 to operate this facility, or 1.25 mills and in addition to that this council or
future councils will be presented with funding salaries of staff and funding benefits of staff, but
the issue really is do we truly need this. He noted matter of bonding to pay for the facility; that
will have training facility, fire protection facility in the Industrial Park; that most of the buildings
are sprinkled , and also taking the land in the Industrial Park, 27 acres, and that forces us to start
looking for land, how were prior to this and how increase level of protection of safety or security,
putting in motion additional costs for future people and at the same time say we have to reduce
property taxes, reduce mill levy but that everything goes up and costs go up but we participate in
the expansion and growth and costs we lay upon our citizens by doing this.

Chief O'Neill stated that vast majority of insurance companies set their rates using ISO (Insurance
Services Office) numbers and they rate the fire department re. water supply, response times,
staffing levels and that ISO recommended a west side Industrial fire station close to 15 years ago,
understands need to protect tax dollar but the fire station is not being placed in Industrial Park
because they want to grow, there is a need to be out there and Industrial Park does have some
sprinkler buildings, that a sprinkler system only keeps the fire in check until the fire department
arrives, that response times are critical, probably arriving in Industrial Park and Congressional
homes district 40% of time within 4 minutes, national standard asks for 90% of time within 4
minute response, and that he has recommended this fire station before 2005, has been asked for
and made presentations to council and public safety committee over the years and message
consistent. He stated they do not have too many firefighters and are moving one of their crews
out to the Industrial Park to save costs and not going to add anybody else out there, those people
can still respond north, west and east from there; that he recommends a SE fire station in 2011 or
2012, and hopes that they would support that; that all the residents deserve good fire protection
and that is what recommending. He stated this is not frivolous growth; that they can do better and
much safer job, that they put their people at risk now in training that they do.

Council Member Christensen stated when questioning something, that this is trying to be realistic
as to what is going on in this community and the level of the expense that they occur, not against
fire protection or police protection but against expansion of facilities that perhaps aren't needed.
He stated he went on a tour of the water treatment plant, that there is a storage area that is not
being used where they could store 14 pickups in the winter - 6,000 sq.ft. and could be more
efficient with what we have than build this storage facility.

Mr. Shields stated re. storage of mosquito control equipment, that a majority of vehicles are
leased during the summertime, have 7 year round; and that they are not asking for a 13,000 sq.ft.
facility but asking for 7,000 sq.ft. mosquito control operations facility in the Industrial Park,
which is about what they have in the leased facility, and would not have the need for a large
leased storage facility but has need for maintenance on equipment that they use.

Christensen questioned staffing of facility. Chief O'Neill stated they have no intention of
increasing staff for the fire station or the training center, that he hopes to be the fire chief for
the next 7 years and will make a personal commitment that he will not ask for additional staffing
for that station in the next 7 years.

Relative to questions re. response time to Congressional homes and also putting half million in
fire station on in the Bronson track, Chief O'Neill reported time trials have shown they can
decrease response times even from the Industrial Park, that this isn't most ideal location in
Industrial Park, that it can be difficult to get out but is still quicker than the fire station on North
Columbia Road to get to Congressional homes - 7 to 8 minutes from North Columbia Road and
less than 5 from Industrial Park..

Chief Packett stated they will staff training facility with existing training staff, use in-house
trainers and instructors who are located in the downtown station. He stated within the next two
weeks they will have before council bids on the Community Service Bureau moving back
downtown to take over the former municipal court space, and that will free up the old fire station
at 17th and 20th for special operations group (bomb team, swat team, negotiations team, ATV's,
bicycles) and all those units operate out of that station because more centrally located and that the
new training center along with the remodeling downtown should meet their capabilities over the
next 10 to 15 years, not only for office space but for storage as well.

Questions were also raised that if the 911 initiative that the County plans on having a vote on in
June were to fail, where put 911 office. Chief Packett stated he can't speak for Mr. Morken but
the plan is within the financial capability of the surcharge money, they would come back to
council for some type of remodeling project within the existing facility in the Police Building.

Council Member Kreun stated this is one of the issues of growth in our community, that some of
the monies they were going to spend on the existing police building will now be transferred and
spent on this training center. The Industrial Park is one of the largest, fastest growing areas of the
city as far as job growth, and need fire protection. He noted that sprinkling systems are only
small retardant before fire department gets there. Growth is good for us and that the issue of the
27 acres which was transferred from the EDC to the JDA because that was not a desirable piece
of land for businesses to utilize, and that they have been working on that site over a period of time
to get that site ready so that it is an acceptable site for this facility. He stated he will support this
and believes in the training.

President Gershman stated this land is marginal land for business development and that is why
the EDC was interested in getting that to JDA, that there are about 2,000 employees in Industrial
Park and that is growing too.

Council Member McNamara stated it is important that the citizens know that as part of this
process that initially this is going to come from current general obligation mills and not going to
impact property taxes, and important that people understand that the operational costs will be
associated with this facility will come out of current operating costs. He stated discussion
process is important and do within the constraints of the budget in terms of what can afford and
if have to move things around, then do that. He stated he will vote for this and comfortable with
talking about this as a complete package to the best extent they can.

2.3 Resolution authorizing issuance and sale of $3,490,000 General Obligation Public Building Bonds, Series 2007A, and calling for the sale thereof._________________
2.4 Resolution authorizing issuance and sale of $1,360,000 Mosquito Control Reserve Revenue Bonds, Series 2007B, and calling for the public sale thereof.____________
There were no comments.

2.5 Advance Refunding of Refunding Improvement Bonds, Series 1999B and 2000A
The city auditor reported he gave council members a revised resolution and recommend-
ation page. Brenda Krueger, Springsted, stated the resolutions before council next week will be calling for the sale of Refunding Bonds, that they will take bids for consideration and award on June 25 which is a special council meeting date. She stated they are proposing refunding improvement bonds, bonds paid with special assessments. They have evaluated the 1999B and the 2000A bonds, the special assessments and the accumulation of pre-payments in the debt service funds for these 2 bond issues, that they will be able to refund these two issues to lower the interest cost and because accumulating pre-payments of special assessments they can reduce the amount of principal that they need to pay in the future because they will apply that to reduce the borrowing amount. They have also evaluated the future assessment collections that are remaining and were able to shorten the term of the bonds, able to shorten the 1999B bonds by 4 years and able to shorten the term of the 2000A bonds by 2 years - interest cost savings, reduce the overall amount of debt and pay off in a shorter period of time. Present value savings of about $400,000 and that nets out the cash, about $200,000 a year cash savings for the remaining term. Cost to issue the debt is a total of about $100,000 and savings numbers are the $400,000 present value savings net of those costs. Bond issue in entirety will be paid off in 2019 - the 1999B bonds will mature in 2015 and prior 2000A bonds will mature in 2019.

Ms. Krueger stated they have arranged for Moody's Investors Service, Beth Weber, to visit with the City on June 15 and spending the day, reason for doing that is growth and economic develop-ment efforts, and want an opportunity for the rating agency to meet with reps. of the City and to tour the city and look at certain activities that have been going on, and effort is to continue to better the City's rating, which will lower your cost of borrowing.

2.6 Request for cost sharing from the International Water Institute.
There were no comments.

2.7 Bids for Project No. 5807, Greenway Cleanup Phase 3.
There were no comments.

2.8 Bids for Project No. 6132, paving East Elmwood Drive.
There were no comments.
2.9 Change Order #2 for Project No. 5990, 2006 English Coulee seeding.
There were no comments.

2.10 Bids for Project No. 6133, overlay Sunbeam Addition east of Belmont Road and Project No. 6134, overlay 62nd Ave.S. from Columbia Road to Washington Street and Belmont Road from 62nd Ave. to Adams Dr.____________________________
Mark Walker, asst. city engineer, reported bids came in under engineer's estimate of
$718,000, low bid at $577,000, that letters were sent to all property owners indicating that assess-
ments lower than what was originally stated by approx. 20%, and stating what their assessments
would be. It was noted that when construction takes place, notices and information will be given
to the property owners.

2.11 Bids for Project No. 6137, paving and street lighting for Countryview 4th Resubdivision.__________________________________________________
There were no comments but revised staff report was presented.

2.12 Bids for Project No. 5996, University Avenue overpass repairs.
There were no comments.

2.13 Bids for Project No. 5988, Dist. 627, paving 40th Ave.S. from S. 20th St. to S. Wash. St., and Project No. 6059, Dist. 453, Trunk Storm Sewer crossing on 40th Ave.S. (1600 block).____________________________________________________________
There were no comments.

2.14 Appointment to the Civil Service Commission.
There were no comments.

2.15 Authorize Public Transportation Department to partner with Jefferson Lines and allow co-location at the Metro Transit Center, 450 Kittson Avenue._____________
Council Member McNamara stated he doesn't think it is the City's place to step in front of
a vendor that is doing business in this community unless as a last resort and the vendor quit the business and no other vendor to step into that business, and in order to keep a service; that isn't the situation. Todd Feland, public works director, reported the solicitation came from Jefferson Lines, that they are currently operating out of the bus depot at Gateway Drive and N. Washington and some concerns about service capabilities of their ticket agent and of the facility, that they contacted the City to see if they could co-locate at the Metro Transit Center with public transit providers. They are offering the City their standard 15% commission fee to use our facility and to have our employee at the Transit Center do any transactions or any assistance that maybe appropriate. He stated they thought it was a good opportunity for the City to partner. He stated his one concern is to make sure that we have enough space on site to be able to handle the situation and thinks that we do and the customer also thinks we do. He stated they are always concerned of taking away somebody else's business and weren't out there soliciting that, and that he thinks it is a good cooperation in transportation; and the fact that they are not satisfied where they are at. It was stated Mr. Kaiser from Jefferson Lines is here tonight, and lot of the ticketing is automated but need to have someone there and we would be able to fill that void.

Council Member McNamara stated the vendor was not satisfied and came to us, and that makes us a competitor to a private vendor in town; that it is not the City's business to compete against private vendors, and understands there is a performance issue with the vendor and that the City gets involved as a last resort in private partnerships , doesn't believe this case is appropriate.

Council Member Kreun stated questions were asked of Jefferson Bus Lines and his understanding is that they are going to make a change regardless of whether they go with us or someone else; and if can enhance the quality of service to community, have to look at that; not feasible for Jefferson Lines to do this by themselves, they don't need a full time person nor a complete building and have to look at economical feasibility of it, they aren't going to build a building nor rent another building nor hire a person to do it, have to look at reality of this.

Council Member Brooks stated he has always said that government stays out of private business, and doesn't like to look at exceptions, however, public transportation (look at airlines industry) and that we are very concerned about trying to get another airline and public transportation is something that you get into as a city, that they used to have Greyhound here, and what putting together is going to give tremendous boost to Jefferson Lines and keep them here, we need a bus service in town, and we are looking at generating some revenue, and thinks we need to do this.

President Gershman stated the private enterprise argument is interesting and sympathetic to, however, have private business that says not satisfied where he is and the private business has come to the City, and this gentleman has made the determination that it is better for his customers and business to be downtown, and will support this.

Fred Kaiser, Jr., regional sales manager with Jefferson Bus Lines, Minneapolis, MN stated that he would say that there is some danger of losing this business because Grand Forks is one of the biggest markets on this route and is intersection of two routes, have one route that runs up and down I-29 from Winnipeg to Sioux Falls down to Kansas City, have one that runs through Minneapolis to here; sales in other markets have been up on the order of 3 or 4%, here they have been flat. He addressed some of the concerns of why they have come to the City, and concern of stepping in front of private enterprise, they operate two models for depots, have company owned depots where they hire the employees and own the building and have stops; and also have the commission agency model where they contract with an individual for commissions to run the depot and sort everything out themselves. Grand Forks is an intermediate market, not big enough to support a company owned depot, however, it is too expensive to have a stand-alone commission agency here, and normally look to partner with a private business like a convenience store, grocery, however, since Grand Forks isn't the small market like Crookston or Willmar, MN they can't get the type of service we need in a location like this out of a smaller retail partner that they partner with because they aren't their primary business, secondary business to them. They don't believe a private business could support this.

Mr. Kaiser stated their commission agent rents space they are currently in and they subsidize that rent so paying it indirectly, the commission is the same, 15%. He stated there are 4 schedules, one from Minneapolis and one from Winnipeg every day, and one that departs south for Sioux Falls and one that departs south for Minneapolis; their commission agent doesn't permit overnight parking on the current premises.

THANKS TO ROGER FOSTER, PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

Mr. Feland thanked Roger Foster who is going to leave us the end of June; that Mr. Foster came to Grand Forks 7 or 8 years ago, that he was mission driven, knew what the mission is and worked to the very end and in this case was to serve the public and public transportation and created a positive image and how to get things done; and much thanks to Mr. Foster.

Roger Foster stated he appreciates support over the last 8 years, that public transportation is very important and when growing a city public transportation has to be part of that growth, and thinks have come a long way and that with leadership made good policy and steadfast decisions.

Council Member Christensen stated he wanted to add his voice to Mr. Foster's leadership, have come a long way in our public transportation with Roger working quietly behind the scenes getting the direction and implementing it and working with constituents that would be affected by that, and thanked Mr. Foster. President Gershman thanked Mr. Foster, that system doesn't lose money and people happy with service and that is accomplishment mostly to his leadership.

INFORMATION ITEMS

3.1 Flood Protection Update.
Information only.

CITIZEN REQUESTS

Maurice Bushaw, 1601 University Avenue, stated we have a big problem, that the dikes are causing problems downstream and in the Red River drainage basin, that according to law that when he was involved with the agriculture dikes, was told that if you have a dike that is over 6 inches it is illegal, and City's dikes are illegal, have to figure out a way to get the Corps to listen, and if they don't, the City will be destroying property up north (roads) and paying damages.
This last flood raised the water at Oslo within 6 inches of 1977 flood, and moved more dirt than he had seen before in a flood. The dike is moving water too fast downstream, from Grand Forks to the Polk County line is about the straightest part of the river and when it hits Marshall County 4 miles of road is 27 miles of river, and now no place for it to go, changed the timing of the moving of the river; and have to do something to slow the water down in Grand Forks so it doesn't move everything, if it comes to big flood Oslo will be gone and who will pay the flood damages, it will be Grand Forks. President Gershman stated the dikes were certified by the federal government that holds the City of Grand Forks harmless for any type of cause for damage payments from anybody and would defer to the city attorney. He asked if there were any questions from council, there were none.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS

1) Council Member Christensen stated that department heads have put together plan for CIP and
asked to have that info sent to council persons, and that he would like to schedule Finance/ Development meetings to review priorities for the next 3 years; that he will have Mr. Duquette schedule a meeting for the finance committee, everybody is welcome.

2) Council Member Kreun presented matter of non-payment of the greenway flood protection maintenance fee by the University, that by last Friday no payment had been made, and should ask Mr. Swanson to direct letter to find out what the concerns are and to come to resolution on this.

ADJOURNMENT

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

Respectfully submitted

John M. Schmisek
City Auditor