Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-14 .. _._~",. ~....... MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONT ANA May 14, 1 990 ************************ The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, May 14, 1990, at 3:30 p.m. Present were Mayor Hawks, Com- missioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, City Manager Wysocki, City Attorney Becker and Clerk of the Commission Sullivan. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. None of the Commissioners requested that any of the Consent Items be removed for discussion. Minutes - May 7, 1990 It was moved by Commissioner Goehrung, seconded by Commissioner Frost, that the minutes for the regular meeting of May 7, 1990 be approved as amended. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. plat City Manager Wysocki reminded the Commission that action on this item was deferred at last week's meeting. Mr. Clair Daines indicated that, although he wrote a letter dated May 1, 1990 re- garding this issue and his name appears on the agenda, the neighbors are actually the ones requesting that this item be addressed. Mr. Michael Coil, attorney representing the residents of Woodridge Subdivision, re- minded the Commission that the subdivision lies east of Wagon Wheel Road, while the Westfield Subdivision lies west of Wagon Wheel Road. He then stated that on May 4, he '----- sent a letter to Mr. Daines indicating that his clients would be willing to discuss the pay- back issue. He also sent a letter dated May 9, listing three possible arbitrators; however, he has received no response to either letter to date. Mr. Coil stated he has had several discussions with the residents of Woodridge Sub- division; and he feels they have a fairly reasonable offer to present to Mr. Daines. He then stated he feels this issue can be resolved, either through discussions by the two parties or through an arbitrator. He then requested that the Commission defer approval of the final plat until such time as this issue has been resolved, noting that the nego- tiation process should be easily completed in two weeks. 05-14-90 ..... j, if - 2 - Mr. Michael Coil stated that, following review of the documents concerning this item, he feels that Condition No. 16 makes it mandatory to resolve the payback issue, ei- ther through negotiations or arbitration. He noted the City Attorney has indicated that the City does not have a legally enforceable position on the payback issue; however, he disagrees with that conclusion. He suggested there was negligent misrepresentation by the City several years ago, when the paperwork for SID No. 610 was drafted. since it did not address the payback option that had been contemplated. He then suggested that steps should be taken to correct the oversight which occurred at the time that SID No. 610 was created. Commissioner Frost noted the Commission had set a deadl ine of May 1 for resolving the payback issue and asked why an arbitrator was not chosen at the April 4 meeting be- tween Mr. Daines and the residents of SID No. 610. Mr. Coil responded that he was first contacted by the residents of Woodridge Sub- division on May 1, because they wanted an attorney with experience in arbitration. He noted that the residents did not know how to get an arbitrator involved in the process. Mr. Clair Daines stated that he feels he has been cooperative in this process. He briefly reviewed the history of the situation, noting that he began in 1980 to address the payback issue. He noted that when this SI D was created, the City did not include a pay- back provision, effectively denying his request. He stated that in 1984, when he devel- oped Westfield Subdivision, Phase I, the payback provision was once again eliminated. He noted that the staff report for Westfield Subdivision, Phase II, which was submitted on February 2, 1990, specifically states there is no basis to enforce a payback on the Westfield development. He noted, however, that at the public hearing before the City Commission, he indicated his willingness to negotiate a payback in good faith; and the fol- lowing Wednesday, the meeting was held at the Community Room of the Library. He stated that during that meeting, he suggested that an arbitrator be selected because it was ap- parent that no agreement could be reached by the two sides. Mr. Daines stated that in mid '-April , he contacted residents of Woodridge Subdivi- sion to determine the status of the process, and learned that Attorney Bob Planalp had been retained to explore the issue. He noted that late on Apri I 30, he received a tele- phone call from Attorney Joby Sabol, saying he wanted to discuss the matter. He noted his next contact was from Attorney Mike Coil, on May 4. Mr. Clair Daines then expressed his displeasure with the activities to date, stating that he feels he has done what he can to meet the condition imposed. He reminded the Commission that the minutes of the meeting of April 2, 1990 specifically stated that "... this negotiation process may not be utilized to hold this project hostage... II He noted that extension of the time for negotiation of a payback, after the deadline has passed, wou Id do 05-14-90 t . i .j, ; - 3 - just that; and he feels that is unfair. Mr. Daines stated that it appears the residents of Woodridge Subdivision do not recogn ize the fact that he had to construct a new sewer line, except for the first 190 feet, parallel to the one installed under SID No. 610, to service the Westfield Subdivision. He further noted that he can extend water to the Westfield Subdivision through a main located in Figgins Addition. Mr. Daines then stated that, if the Commission were to establish a fair payback amount at this time, he would be willing to agree to that payback. He then urged the Commission to make a decision so that he may move forward with his develop- ment this summer. In response to a question from Commissioner Frost, City Attorney Becker stated he does not believe the City is obligated to enforce any payback, based on the information he has seen from previous actions and this subject action. Commissioner Frost then asked what process the Commission must follow to eliminate Condition No. 16 from the conditions for approval of the preliminary plat. The City Attorney responded that the subject condition was generated by the City Commission, rather than being a recommended condition forthcoming from the Planning Staff and City-County Planning Board. He also noted it is not the type of condition normally attached to approval of a preliminary plat. He then suggested that if the Com- mission wishes, it may remove the condition by a motion and vote. Mr. Don Cowles, 117 Heritage Drive, stated that when he purchased his lots in Woodridge Subdivision from Clair Daines, the SlOts were not current; and he had to pay almost two years in back assessments plus penalty and interest. He noted that when the water and sewer lines were installed under Special Improvement District No. 610, those lines were intended to service the 22 homes which have been constructed on the east side of Wagon Wheel Road as well as the approximately 66 homes that were proposed along the west side of Wagon Wheel Road. He stated that the 22 homes in Woodridge Subdivision are now paying the entire costs of that SID, while the approximately 22 homes in Phase I of Westfield Subdivision are enjoying the services provided through the extension of those water and sewer lines whi Ie not paying for them. He noted it is too late to require that the houses in Phase I participate in the SID costs; however, he stated he feels that Phase II should be required to do so. He stated the residents in SID No. 610 are only attempt- ing to recover the proportionate principal and interest costs of that SID, rather than having 22 properties pay the entire costs of a district which was created to serve 88 prop- erties. In response to a question from Commissioner Swanson, Mr. Cowles stated that the change of attorneys from Bob Planalp to Joby Sabol to Mike Coil caused the allotted time for negotiation to elapse before the residents of SID No. 610 were prepared to act. 05-14-90 j. I ( , - 4 - In response to another question from Commissioner Swanson, Mr. Coil stated that the residents are prepared to submit to binding arbitration at this time. He noted that a two-week extension should provide the time necessary to complete the process, since this appears to be a straight-forward issue. Commissioner Frost noted the condition established by the Commission was for nego- tiation of a payback, with or without an arbitrator, questioning why the residents decided it was necessary to retain an attorney. Mr. Cowles responded that at the initial meeting, selection of an arbitrator was dis- cussed, but no action was taken. Mr. Ray Erickson, 115 Silverwood Drive, questioned whether the residents of SI D No. 610 had misunderstood the condition as it was written, asking that it be read. He stated it was their impression that arbitration could be effected after May 1. City Manager Wysocki read Condition No. 16, as follows: That the developer and residents of S.I.D. No. 610 will agree on a payback amount by May 1, 1990, by themselves or with an arbitrator; the City of Bozeman will then administer the financial transaction. Mr. Erickson then noted that the residents have not received a satisfactory re- sponse to their questions about the City Engineer's notes and figures concerning a pay- back to SID No. 610. The City Manager responded that no provision for a payback was included when SID No. 610 was created; and that is what has caused the problem for the residents of that SID. In response to a question from Commissioner Goehrung, Mr. Daines stated he is not willing to enter into binding arbitration at this time. He noted that becomes a formal, lengthy, legal process; and it would delay construction past this summer's season. Mayor Hawks suggested that the process of binding arbitration might not necessarily be lengthy. He also noted that the condition does not restrict him from beginning his de- velopment. Mr. Coil stated that to allow Mr. Daines to proceed with his development will remove the leverage which residents of SID No. 610 now have; and the arbitration would probably not be resolved for an extended period of time. He once again asked for a two-week ex- tension of the time for arbitrating the matter. Commissioner Frost noted the Commission carefully worded the condition to ensure that both sides were on equal ground, not with one party having leverage over the other. He stated it is apparent that one party did not act in good faith during the month given to finalize the condition; and he does not feel it is fair to penalize the other party at this time. In response to questions from the Commission, the City Attorney stated he does not 05-14-90 ------' " - ~ ~' ,(" . . - 5 - believe that Condition No. 16 prevents Mr. Daines from continuing with his project. He noted that under the condition, the City is simply offering to administer the financial transactions agreed to by the two private parties. He noted that if no agreement is reached, then the City has nothing to administer. Commissioner Knapp stated that when the Commission added this condition, they al- so encouraged the parties to seek arbitration immediately, and set a reasonable deadline to protect both parties. She stated that the minutes from that meeting further reflect that the City staff could not serve in the capacity of arbitrator, since it might appear that they would be biased. She then noted that what happened ten years ago is beside the point, and should not be a topic of discussion at this time. Commissioner Goehrung suggested the possibility of tabling action on this item for a period of two weeks, noting that would essentially provide an additional two weeks to re- solve the payback issue. He noted, however, this action would not provide any assurance of what action the Commission may take at that time. Commissioner Swanson stated he feels it would be unfair to Mr. Daines to extend the time for negotiation. He noted that Mr. Daines attempted to meet the condition imposed by the Commission; and no one has contested that fact. Dr. Ken Spain, 105 Heritage Drive, stated the residents of Woodridge Subdivision sent a letter to Mr. Daines, dated May 4, requesting that this matter be subject to binding arbitration; and they have received no response to date. He stated that approximately mid-April, as a result of the meeting of Apri I 4, he contacted City Manager Wysocki to in- form him that it appeared no agreement could be reached without arbitration and asked for a list of arbitrators. He noted that he did not receive those names until April 30. Dr. Spain then stated that he began the process of seeking a payback on SID No. 610 in November; however, he did not receive a response to his inquiry until January 22, 1990. City Manager Wysocki stated that Dr. Spain did contact him following the April 4 meeting, and asked him to arbitrate the matter. He noted that, due to the suggestion that City staff could be jaundiced on this issue, he did develop a list of possible arbitrators and submit them to Dr. Spain. Dr. Spain stated that the minutes of meetings of the City Commission held in 1983 and 1984 clearly reflect that there would be a payback to SID No. 610. He noted that the City Engineer also developed the figures for that payback. Dr. Spain then stated that, not only are the residents of Woodridge Subdivision paying the principal and interest pay- ments for the entire SID, they are paying taxes on these improvements as well. It was moved by Commissioner Frost, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, that the Commission reaffirm its approval of the preliminary plat for Westfield Subdivision, Phase 05-14-90 ..' ~ ~ , , , - 6 - ", subject to the conditions as set forth on April 2, 1990. The motion carried by the fol- lowing Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. The City Manager presented Ordinance No. 1310, as reviewed by the City Attorney, entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 1310 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING THE METHOD FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF STREETS, ALLEYS AND PUBLIC PLACES AND PROVIDING FOR THE METHOD OF PAYING SAID COSTS THEREOF PURSUANT TO 7-12-4401 ET SEQ. AND REPEALING ORDI- NANCE NO. 295. The City Manager reminded the Commission that this ordinance was discussed at last week's meeting. He then recommended that the ordinance be provisionally adopted at this time and that it be brought back in two weeks for final adoption. It was moved by Commissioner Swanson, seconded by Commissioner Knapp, that the Commission provisionally adopt Ordinance No. 1310, providing the method for maintenance of streets, alleys and public places and the method for paying said costs. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. and maintenance of trees in all or the method of a in the costs City Manager Wysocki presented Ordinance No. 1311, as reviewed by the City At- torney, entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 1311 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING THE METHOD FOR THE PLANTING AND MAINTENANCE OF TREES IN ALL PUBLIC PLACES, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND PARKS AND PROVIDING FOR THE METHOD OF PAYING SAID COSTS THEREOF. The City Manager noted this ordinance is similar to the above ordinance. He then recommended that the Commission provisionally adopt the ordinance and that it be brought back in two weeks for final adoption. Mayor Hawks asked if Section 2 of the ordinance prohibits residents from hiring a contractor to trim the boulevard trees by their homes. The City Attorney stated that this ordinance does not preclude such activity. He 05-14-90 ~ ., - 7 - noted, however, that the Commission may wish to establish a procedure for allowing such private trimming operations to take place through adoption of another ordinance. He noted that in Helena, the City requires an individual to acquire a permit before trimming or re- moval of any trees In the parking strip is allowed. Commissioner Swanson thanked City Attorney Becker for preparing this ordinance quickly so that creation of a tree maintenance district can be accomplished in conjunction with creation of a street maintenance district. He then asked what basis was used for de- veloping the ordinance. The City Attorney responded that he followed the same statutory process as with creation of a street maintenance district. He noted that telephone conversations with the City Attorneys in Billings, Great Falls, Helena and Missoula revealed that none of those communities have tree maintenance districts, although Missoula did have a boulevard main- tenance district many, many years ago. It was moved by Commissioner Knapp, seconded by Commissioner Goehrung, that the Commission provisionally adopt Ordinance No. 1311, providing the method for the planting and maintenance of trees in all public places, rights-of-way and parks and the method of paying the costs thereof. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. and variances to the zone code, and the criteria for review and The City Manager stated that included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Assistant to the City Manager Ron Brey, along with a substantial amount of back-up information. Assistant to the City Manager Ron Brey briefly highlighted the information submit- ted, noting it has been provided as an on-going reference with genera I guider ines for ad- dressing requests for variances. The Assistant reminded the Commission that, under the interim zoning ordinance, they must now consider applications for deviations, which are waivers of zoning re- strictions in the overlay districts and from provisions of the sign code, and for non-area variances. Assistant Brey stated that deviations must be tied to overlay or signage provisions of the zone code. He noted those requests will be considered by the Design Review Sub- committee or the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission, depending upon the nature of the request; and a recommendation will be submitted to the Commission for final action. He noted that deviations are actually relaxations of the underlying zoning requirements in 05-14-90 / ~ I o , - 8 - exchange for the described overlay district intentions. The Assistant then cited, as an example, an application submitted several years ago for permission to re-establish a front porch on an historic structure in an historic district, in keeping with the architectural in- tegrity of the structure. He noted that the front porch protruded into the required setback; therefore, a variance was required. He noted that under the current process, that request would be treated as a deviation, being considered first by the HPAC, with a recommendation for approval or denial being forwarded to the Commission for final action. Assistant Brey then addressed variances, noting they result from hardships which are unique to a specific parcel. He noted that requests for variances will be processed by the Planning staff, with a staff report being forwarded to the appropriate body. He stated that Bozeman is the only community in the State where the City Commission has de- cided to retain the right to consider certain types of variances, rather than allowing the Board of Adjustment to consider all such requests. The Assistant stated there are three types of variances: (1) dimensional variances, which include area and setbacks, and will usually be considered by the Board of Adjust- ment; (2) use variances, which will not be allowed, but which can be addressed through the planned unit development, zone code amendment or zone map change processes; and (3) non-area variances, which include off-street parking spaces and landscaping re- quirements, and are generally to come before the City Commission. The Assistant then reviewed the following criteria which must be addressed when considering a request for variance. He also cautioned the Commission that a 4 to 1 vote is required to approve a request, rather than a simple majority. 1. The variance will not be contrary to the public interest; 2. Owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship; and 3. The spirit of the ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done. Assistant Brey stated that a balance of these three criteria must be achieved during the deciSion-making process; and an affirmative response to only one or two of the criteria is not usually adequate to approve a requested variance. He noted that in making the de- cision, it is important that the Commission establish a record of its findings related to the ba lancing of these three criteria. He then cautioned the Commission that appeals of any decision are made to the District Court, which will review the action taken by the Com- mission and its balancing efforts in making the final decision prior to any Court decision. He noted that the Court generally allows latitude in discretionary authority of the local government in the balance test. The Assistant stated that when considering a request for variance, it is important to remember that the hardship must be unique to the property in question and not to the 05-14-90 it' . I " - 9 - district in general. He suggested that items such as the physical shape of the lot. flood plain designations, lot size, and location of the site could be eligible for variance consid- eration. He noted that a self-imposed hardship, such as digging a pit for gravel, cannot be considered for variance applications. Assistant Brey stated that a variance must apply to the land, not to the individual or the use. Assistant to the City Manager Ron Brey stated that the Planning Staff will prepare a staff report for each variance requests. He noted that in that report, the staff will provide an analysis of the application and the specific criteria which must be addressed. He further noted the report will contain a recommendation for approval, possibly subject to specific conditions, or denial. The Commission thanked Assistant Brey for his presentation. Discussion - request for funding of tree inventory and management plan City Manager Wysocki noted that a memo from Dennis Seibel was distributed at last week's meeting. He noted that if the City is successful, it must provide a match for the $2.450 grant from the Forestry Division of the Department of State Lands. Cultural Affairs Officer Dennis Seibel stated that the budget he has submitted as. a part of this grant application includes $2,140 in local funding; and he intends to gather at least a portion of that funding from private sources through fund raising efforts by the Cultural Affairs Advisory Committee. He suggested they should be able to raise at least half of the monies, noting they can possibly increase that effort if required to do so by the Commission. In response to a question from Commissioner Goehrung, the City Manager suggested that the Commission could approve funding of the entire $2,140, recognizing that a portion of those monies is to be from fund raising efforts. It was moved by Commissioner Goehrung, seconded by Commissioner Frost, that the Commission approve the expenditure of up to $2,200 to match a grant from the Forestry Division of the Department of State Lands for a tree inventory and management plan. City Manager Wysocki asked the Commissioners from what source these monies are to be expended. Commissioner Swanson suggested that action on this item be delayed until staff has had an opportunity to review the budget and determine where those monies may be avail- able. Cultural Affairs Officer Seibel stated he does not need a commitment today. He noted that the monies must be committed during this fiscal year; and he hopes to have the project completed in June. He then suggested that the Commission could delay action until 05-14-90 l 01" : - 10 - the Cultural Affairs Advisory Committee has completed its fund raising efforts, so the amount of the local funding deficit is known. It was moved by Commissioner Frost, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, that action on the above motion be tabled until the Cultural Affairs Officer reports back to the Commission on the amount of the deficit, and staff provides a possible source of funding. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commission- er Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. Discussion - report from City Attorney re subdivision review City Manager Wysocki stated that included in the Commissioners' packets were a memo from City Attorney Becker along with a substantial amount of back-up information. City Attorney Becker reviewed the memo, noting that he attempted to address the legal issues involved in the Issue of subdivision review in the jurisdictional area. He noted that the back-up information is a chronological compilation of the correspondence between him, County Attorney Mike Salvagni and the Attorney General's office. The City Attorney stated that when the question of who has the power to review and make decisions on subdivision in the jurisdictional area was submitted to the Attorney GeneraJls office, Mike Greeley was the AG; however, Mark Racicot was the AG when the opinion was rendered. The City Attorney then stated that Mike Greeley assured him that Section 76-2-312, M.C.A., would not be considered in rendering of the opinion; however, that is the basis for the final opinion that was issued. He then cited that section of the statute, as follows: A city or town which has as its plan of government the commission-manager plan shall be excluded from the provisions of 76-2-310 and 76-2-311 which define extraterritorial authority to review proposed subdivisions. The City Attorney noted that this section of the statutes was adopted in the early 1970's; however, he has not yet reviewed the legislative history in an attempt to determine the reason. City Attorney Becker stated the Attorney General's opinion states that the County Commission has jurisdiction over subdivisions within the 4t-mile planning jurisdictional ar- ea; however, the City Commission has jurisdiction over zoning matters in the 3-mile juris- dictional area. He further noted that the City's Director of Public Service must sign off on subdivision plats within the jurisdictional area, assuring that all regulations pertaining to streets and alleys have been met. The City Attorney stated that the Attorney General's opinion has the status of law until it is overturned by a judicial decision or a statutory change is made in the Legisla- ture. He suggested that alternatives available to the Commission at this time include (1) 05-14-90 ..' ,1 ~. . . - 11 - entering into an interlocal agreement with the County and (2) contesting the validity of Section 76-2-312, M.C.A., after which the AG opinion could be overturned. Mayor Hawks noted that the City of Kalispell is currently in the process of chang- ing its governmental structure to the commission-manager form. He then suggested there may be several other cities in the same situation, noting that they may not be aware of these problems. The City Attorney stated that the Legislature can change the statute, if a bill is submitted for their consideration; however, he noted that is probably the most difficult approach. Planning Director Epple noted it appears that the Attorney General's opinion has raised more questions than it answered. He stated that County Attorney Salvagni has de- termined that the Bozeman Area Subdivision Regulations, rather than the Gallatin County Subdivision Regulations, are to be utilized in reviewing and approving subdivisions within the jurisdictional area, which is acceptable. He noted, however, that the County Attorney has further determined that the County Commission may unilaterally change the Bozeman Area Subdivision Regulations, which leaves the issue in an uncertain position. The Planning Director then suggested that probably the best alternative to pursue at this time would be an interlocal agreement with the County. He cautioned that prepara- tion of such an agreement will take a substantial amount of time and participation by the City Attorney, County Attorney and planning staffs from both jurisdictions; therefore, he indicated a desire for commitment by both governing bodies before beginning the process. Ms. Daria Joyner, Executive Director of the Bozeman Area Chamber of Commerce, suggested that this issue might be a long-term reason for considering adoption of self- government powers. Commissioner Knapp noted that the Local Government Study Commission suggested that self-governing powers be placed on the ballot within five years. In response to a question from the Mayor, she then stated a willingness to work with the City Attorney to review the Study Commission's report and the process for placing the issue on the ballot. City Attorney Becker reminded the Commission that the memo previously submitted by County Attorney Salvagni listed five questions which need to be resolved. He noted that the County Attorney has expressed an interest in attempting to resolve them, with an interlocal agreement being a possible method of doing so. The City Attorney then stated that if an interlocal agreement is the method which the Commission wishes to pursue, that should be the only action taken. He suggested that to pursue legal or legislative action at the same time could create problems on attempting to develop an agreement with the County. In response to a question from Commissioner Frost, City Attorney Becker reviewed 05-14-90 . .. " , - 12 - the legal process that would be followed to contest the validity of the statute upon which the Attorney General's opinion is based. He noted that he would prepare a complaint, which would be served on the Attorney General and Gallatin County. He noted those agencies would then have thirty days to respond, after which there would be a period for discovery, a fil ing of briefs and then the trial. He estimated the process would probably take six to nine months; and the decision would probably be appealed to the Supreme Court, which would take another six to nine months for processing. The Commissioners concurred that they would like to pursue the option of develop- Ing an Interlocal agreement to address the questions raised. Mayor Hawks requested that a report on tt~.e guidelines for changing the form of government be placed on next week1s agenda. He further requested a review of the ad- vantages and dlsad'(antages of the change. Discussion - Interlocal Agreement between the City and County establishing a City-County Board of Health The City Manager reminded the Commission that Mayor Hawks is currently serving on the City-County Board of Health. He noted that the Board has been operating without an I nterlocal Agreement; and the process of developing one began several years ago, dur- ing the tenure of former City Attorney Mary Crumbaker-Smlth. He stated that the County Commission has approved this agreement and has, in fact, forwarded the signed original to the City. Mayor Hawks expressed some concerns about the agreement as submitted. He noted that the membership of the Board has recently been expanded to Include all three County Commissioners. He then noted that the Board considers highly technical medical matters; and he feels that it should have a strong medically trained core group rather than becom- ing a political board. The City Manager reminded the Commission that this agreement is not yet in effect; therefore, its provisions are not enforceable at this time. He then directed the Com- mission1s attention to the proposed composition of the Board, which includes one County Commissioner, one City Commissioner, and three members appointed by the County Commis- sion and approved by the City Commission. Responding to Commissioner Khapp, the City Manager indicated that the State stat- utes require that a first class city must have a health board, contract with someone, or enter into an agreement with the County to establish a joint board. The Mayor noted that this is an administrative board. which sets the requirements and duties of the Health Department. He expressed concern that the funding for this de- partment is currently being carefully reviewed, with an eye for monies to fund a mental 05-14-90 , ;. , .. . .' - 13 - health program; and if the monies are taken from this activity, it could be seriously jeop- ardized. In response to a question from Commissioner Knapp, the City Manager stated that the statutes allow levying of up to five mills; however, only 2.77 mills are being levied on a county-wide basis. Mayor Hawks questioned whether the proposed appointment process would ensure that the health concerns of the community are met in an enlightened manner. He stated he feels it is important that some medical expertise be included within the voting membership of the Board. The Mayor also expressed concern that the proposed appointment process could lead to disagreements, particularly if the City Commission does not approve of a County Commission appointment. The City Manager suggested that establishing ex officio positions, to be filled by persons with medical backgrounds, might address the Mayor's concerns. I n response to a question from Commissioner Goehrung, the Mayor stated that the complexion of the Health Board has changed in recent times. He noted that at one time, a veterinarian served on the Board; and his expertise was extremely helpful. He noted that having three County Commissioners serving has changed the format substantially. In response to questions from the Commission, City Attorney Becker reviewed the statutory composition of the City-County Board of Health, set forth in Section 50-2-106, M.C.A., as follows: (2) A city-county board of health consists of: (a) one person appointed by the county commissioners who serves at their pleasure; ( b) one person appointed by the governing body of each city that participates in the city-county board who serves at the pleasure of the appointing governing body. (c) additional members appointed by the county commissioners and governing body or bodies of the city or cities participating in the city-county board as mutually agreed upon who serve at the pleasure of the appointing commissioners or governing body. (3) The board shall be composed of at least five persons. Terms of ap- pointed members shall be staggered and shall be for 3 years each. Mayor Hawks stated an interest in equal representation on the Board, suggesting that this section be revised to provide for a six-member board, as follows: one County Commissioner, one City Commissioner, two members appointed by the County Commission, and two members appointed by the City Commission. Following a brief discussion, the Commissioners concurred, noting that all appointments must be mutually agreed upon per the statutes. City Manager Wysocki suggested that a provision could be made for ex officio mem- bers with expertise in the medical fields. Following discussion, the Commissioners con- curred that would be acceptable. The City Attorney noted such a provision would be ap- propriate under No.6, or could possibly be included under 2(d). 05-14-90 .. " " I - 14 - City Manager Wysocki suggested that under No.7, a provision be included that would allow for an involved party to acquire the files and equipment, at an appraised value set by a third party, from this operation In the event the agreement is dissolved. He noted this would protect the City and County from the requirement to go to a public auction to purchase those pieces of property that have been acquired and utilized under this agreement. Following a brief discussion on this proposal, the Commission concurred it would be appropriate to include such a provision. The Commission then asked that this Interlocal Agreement be submitted back to the County Commission, along with the proposed revisions, for their consideration. Discussion - FYI Items The City Manager presented to the Commission the following "For Your Informationll items. (1) Letter to the Commission from Ms. J.L.S. Mitchell, 122 South Church Ave- nue, regarding the City's historic preservation efforts. Mayor Hawks indicated that Keith Swenson, Chairman of the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission, will respond to the letter. (2) Agenda and packet for the City-County Planning Board meeting to be held at 7: 00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 15, in the Commission Room. (3) Agenda and packet for the Board of Adjustment meeting to be held at 1: 30 p.m. on Thursday, May 17, in the Commission Room. (4) Letter from Chris Boyd thanking the Commissioners for their participation in the Gallatin Valley Land Trust meetings last week. (5) A memo from Craig Brawner, Assistant City Engineer, regarding the oil vio- lations at United Parcel Service. The City Manager noted that the representatives of UPS were not aware of the problems being incurred because of the oil tank being full and overflowing into the City's sewer system; and they have been very cooperative in working with the City to address the problem. He noted that in the future, UPS will have the oil tank pumped on a regular basis. (6) The City Manager submitted his weekly report, as follows. (1) The bollards have been replaced on Garfield Street and are being placed at Grant Street per agreement with Mr. Henderson. (2) The City crews are continuing to paint and stripe the inter- sections as well as the crack sealing efforts. (3) Renovation of the bandshell is officially complete; and an ice cream social will be held on June 19, at the opening concert of the season. (4) The IBM System/38 computer was upgraded with a new disk drive and more memory last week. He noted that the system will now be running with approximately 30 05-14-90 ..; I - 15 - percent capacity remaining, and will run quicker. (5) A reception for Dr. Keith Chambers will be held on Tuesday from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn. (6) He is continuing to work on the budget. (7) He noted it was a pleasure to meet Ms. Butterfield, the new Superintendent of Schools, at the Interagency Breakfast on Wednesday. (7) Commissioner Knapp stated she attended a meeting of the Planning Committee for the Governor's Conference on Libraries in Helena on Wednesday. She noted the con- ference will be held on January 6-8, with sixty delegates in attendance; and four delegates will be selected to attend the President's Conference on Libraries in Washington, D. C., in July 1991. She stated that the sixty delegates attending the Governor1s Conference will be equally divided among business and general citizens; government officials; library person- nel; and trustees and friends. (8) Commissioner Swanson stated he attended the Big Brothers and Big Sisters reception held on Thursday night at the Elk's Club. (9) Commissioner Swanson stated he attended the MLCT District 10 meeting held on Wednesday afternoon, noting several legislative issues were discussed. (10) Commissioner Goehrung stated the grantwriting workshop ended on Thursday last week. He indicated he will write a memo to the department heads to let them know about the various sources of funding which are available. (11) Mayor Hawks stated he attended the Interagency Breakfast on Wednesday morning. (12 ) Mayor Hawks attended the gift-giving ceremony at the East Gallatin Recre- ation Area on Tuesday afternoon, when the Wally Byam Caravan Club International donated monies to the community. He noted that Past President Bob Laliberte and his wife Kathy, who reside in Billings, are a gracious couple and have represented Montana very well. (13) Mayor Hawks distributed to the Commission copies of two newspaper articles submitted to him by Mr. Tim Crawford, noting they reflect why the Commission is taking the steps it is at the present time to ensure appropriate development. ( 14) Mayor Hawks asked who will be attending the Orson Lectures at MSU on Tuesday evening. Commissioner Swanson and Commissioner Goehrung stated their intentions to attend. Consent Items City Manager Wysocki presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. - "National Association of Insurance Women's Week" - May 20-26, 05-14-90 t .. I , - 16 - Staff re ort - re ay or, eeves report Commission Resolution No. 2786 - intent to create SID No. 655 - pavinW of Concord Drive and construction of sidewalk along west side of agon Wheel Road in Westfield Subdivision, Phase /I; set public hearing for June 4, 1990 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2786 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN TO CREATE SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 655 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACCOMPLISHING THE ENGINEERING DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION, INSPECTION AND ENGINEERING CERTIFICATION OF AS- PHAL T STREET PAVING, INTEGRAL CURB AND GUtTER, AND STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ON CONCORD DRIVE AND A PORTION OF AN UNNAMED NORTH/SOUTH STREET IN WESTFIELD SUBDIVISION, PHASE I I (FORMERL Y REFERRED TO AS FIELDSTONE DRIVE), AND ALL OTHER NEC- ESSARY APPURTENANCES TO LOCAL STANDARDS LESS SIDEWALKS; AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THAT PORTION OF WAGON WHEEL ROAD BORDERING WESTFIELD SUBDIVISION, PHASE I I. Commission Resolution No. 2787 - settin public hearin on 6.5-percent water rate Increase or June 18, 1990 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2787 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ORDERING A PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON A PROPOSED SIX AND ONE-HALF PERCENT (6.5%) INCREASE IN THE WATER RATE CHARGED TO CUSTOMERS OF THE MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM. Commission Resolution No. 2788 - settin ublic hearin on 10.5-percent sewer rate Increase or June 18, 1 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2788 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ORDERING A PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON A PROPOSED TEN AND ONE-HALF PERCENT (10.5%) INCREASE IN THE SEWER RATE CHARGED TO CUSTOMERS OF THE MUNICIPAL SEWER SYSTEM. fee schedule, COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2790 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ESTABLISHING A REVISED LANDFILL FEE SCHEDULE FOR US- ERS OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN LANDFILL. Commission Resolution No. 2791 - approving the application of Scientific Materials Cor oration for tax reduction under Section 15-24-1401, et seq . , COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2791 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF SCIENTIFIC MATERIALS CORPORATION FOR TAX REDUCTION UNDER SECTION 15-24-1401, ET SEQ., MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED, AND CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2660. Chan e Order No. 1 - Wheat Drive Lift Station - add $800 and 0 da s - o nston xcavating, nc. Authorize absence of City Manager Wysocki - May 18-28, 1990 Claims It was moved by Commissioner Frost, seconded by Commissioner Swanson, that the Commission approve the Consent Items as listed, and authorize and direct the appropriate 05-14-90 - . ',",,'. .9'{ r ., '.'-l- - 17 - .;,i;; persons to complete the necessary actions. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. Adjournment - 5:47 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Swanson ,seconded by Commissioner Knapp, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, Commissioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. . 05-14-90