Loading...
04/02/01 City Council Minutes1748 A REGULAR MEETING OF THE KALISPELL CITY COUNCIL WAS HELD AT 7:00 P.M. MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2001, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT CITY HALL IN KALISPELL, MONTANA. MAYOR WILLIAM E. BOHARSKI PRESIDED. COUNCIL MEMBERS JIM ATKINSON, DALE HAARR, RANDY KENYON, DUANE LARSON, FRED LEISTIKO, DOUG SCARFF, RON VAN NATTA AND CITY MANAGER CHRIS KUKULSKI AND CITY ATTORNEY GLEN NEIER WERE PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER DON COUNSELL WAS ABSENT. Mayor Boharski called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA APPROVAL Haarr moved approval of the Agenda. The motion was seconded by Scarff. There was no discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon vote. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL 1. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting March 19, 2001 2. Approval of Claims per Payables Register - $100,621.58 3. Authorization to Sell Two Used Solid Waste Trucks Scarff moved approval of the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Van Natta. There was no discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC None ORDINANCE 1380 - MOUNTAIN VIEW PLAZA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT - 2ND READING Crosswell Development LLC and Pack & Company are proposing a commercial development at the southeast corner of Highway 93 and West Reserve Drive. Ordinance 1380 passed on first reading March 19th. Leistiko moved second reading of Ordinance 1380, an ordinance approving a Planned Unit Development on certain real property owned by Pack and Co. The motion was seconded by Van Natta. There was no discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon roll call vote. FINAL PLAT APPROVEL - WESTGATE SUBDIVISION This is a request for final plat approval of Westgate Subdivision, a four -lot commercial subdivision on 2.4 acres located on the west side of Corporate Way, north of Highway 2 West. Van Natta moved approval of the Final Plat and the Subdivision Improvements Agreement for Westgate Subdivision. The motion was seconded by Scarff. There was no discussion. Kalispell City Council Minutes April 2, 2001 1749 The motion carried unanimously upon vote. RESOLUTION 4607 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A FIRE LANE AT STREAM INTERNATIONAL The proposed fire lane would extend 206 feet north of the intersection of US Highway 2 WeSt and Glenwood Drive and extend north to the intersection of Huslky Street. Scarff moved Resolution 4607, al resolution establishing a fire access lane on the west side of Glenwood Drive (by Stream International), pursuant to Sections 6.17 (c) and 2.01, Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, and declaring an effective date. The motion was seconded by Larson. There was discussion. The motion carried unanimously union roll call vote. RESOLUTION 4608 - BUDGET AMENDME� Each year the Police Department receives Local Law Enforcement Block Grant money through the Department of Justice. The police budget needs to be amended to allow for the expenditure of an additional $3,886.00 that was received. Police chief Frank Garner said the funds will be used to update the mobile data terminals in the patrol cars and to purchase fire equipment for the arson investigation team. Atkinson moved Resolution 4608, resolution to amend the annual appropriations of the City of Kalispell, Montana, as set forth in the 2000-01 Budget adopted by the City Council for the Local Law Enforcement Block Grants Progr The motion was seconded by Scarff. . 7. There was no discussion. The motion carried unanimously upon roll call vote. a.+saa.+�caar.raivn+ V V"VJ.2VA. aLY i - <—WVitl l 19V1 JM. KLJm.Lx410.Ln.fL11 V Z5 mukLri1 Since Flathead County gave notice of its withdrawal from the CAB, there have been concerns about the disposition of assets. Council is being asked to authorize the filing of a Declaratory Judgement Action to determine the disposition of the FRDO reserve funds, which amounts to approximately $ 50,000. Leistiko moved to authorized the t the City of Whitefish, to file Flathead County to determine t] Flathead Regional Development Of was seconded by Larson. There was discussion. ity Attorney, in conjunction with a declaratory judgement against e property distribution of the :ice's reserve funds. The motion Larson commented the County's wiIhdrawal takes effect June 30th, and asked if a decision on the declaratory judgement would be forthcoming before then. Neier said a decision from approximately two to three montl Supreme Court it will take six tc the District Court will take is, but if it's appealed to the � twelve months longer. Kalispell City Council Minutes April 2, 2001 Page 2 of 6 1750 Larson noted the motion includes participation by the City of Whitefish. He asked what happens if Whitefish declines to participate. Neier stated Columbia Falls has already agreed not to pursue any action against the County, and if Whitefish votes the same way, then it -would probably be futile to file a declaratory judgement. Kenyon, referring to a letter received today from Flathead County's private attorney Jim Mickelson, said it sounds like the Commissioners plan on keeping the entire reserve fund. Neier said the letter "kind of indicates that", but it's his impression that the Commissioners feel they provide about seventy percent of FRDO's budget and are therefore entitled to about seventy percent of the reserve fund. He said Kalispell, Whitefish and Columbia Falls would then share the remaining thirty percent. Neier said if we do pursue a declaratory judgement, our position would be that the remaining cities under the agreement are entitled to all of the money. Haarr said he's concerned that the Commissioners want to control the planning for all of the areas outside Kalispell, Whitefish and Columbia Falls. He said if that happens, there won't be much need for a tri-city planning department and feels everything should be done to work out this problem. Haarr commented it's premature to put the cities in an adversarial position with the County by filing a declaratory judgement, and suggested holding off on filing the suit until they can sit down with the Commissioners and talk. Kukulski said he recognizes the cities have to retain a working relationship with the County, but asking a judge for an interpretation of the contract doesn't seem to be unreasonable. Van Natta stated the cities need to know what their rights are under the agreement and a judge can make that determination. He said if the Commissioners had been willing to participate in joint planning, they would have worked with the City some time ago. Boharski commented it appears there are basically three areas of dispute: 1) who's entitled to the reserve fund; 2) the agreement forming the joint board; and 3) do the cities retain any extra- territorial jurisdiction. Neier said the jurisdictional area was established in 1971 and it appears the County wants to negotiate a new resolution establishing a jurisdictional area that would be less than what exists today. He said the County's attorney agrees that the Commissioners cannot unilaterally alter the existing resolution, however, he indicated the County's participation as far as financial assistance or cooperative planning won't happen unless the cities agree to a different jurisdictional area. Neier stated if the jurisdictional area is altered, it would probably alter the members of the board and therefore you would not have a City -County Planning Board as currently constituted. Boharski said he's still concerned with the extra -territorial jurisdiction. He said if the City takes what appears to be a hostile position, then the County won't give the City any opportunity for extra -territorial zoning. Kalispell City Council Minutes April2, 2001 Page 3 of 6 1751 Leistiko said the extra -territorial jurisdiction will stay in place unless all parties agree to change it. He said the issue right now is the reserve funds and he feels the City needs to file the declaratory judgement to get a ruling as soon as possible. Narda Wilson, FRDO, commented that in the absence of an interlocal agreement, the County would have its staff processing applications in the County jurisdictional area and the City would have its staff processing applications. She said theoretically, the City -County Planning Board could be served by both the County and City staff. Wilson said she doesn't think the change in the CAB changes the extra -territorial zoning or the make-up of the Planning Board, but it may change who writes the staff reports. Neier agreed, stating the Planning Board can function as Wilson described, but "it's not going to function smoothly". Kukulski said the letter from the County's attorney was just received today, and rather than discussing the various interpretations of the interlocal agreement, the Council needs to make a decision concerning the disposition of assets and whether a declaratory judgement should be filed. Haarr said he would like to see the Council approach this situation positively and try to work something out with the County. He said we won't know what the County wants until we talk to the Commissioners. Kukulski said for the past three months, the Commissioners haven't been interested in discussing the issue and simply said we would get a letter from their attorney. Kenyon commented that discussions can continue with the Commissioners even if suit is filed, and the City can drop the declaratory judgement at any time. He said the Council should go ahead with it. Boharski stated it makes it hard to discuss other issues when you place yourself in an adversarial position. Larson said he has attended almost every meeting since the County's withdrawal from the CAB was announced and the question has been asked repeatedly to talk about it. He said the answer given every time has been "we've made our minds up, we don't want to talk about it" . Boharski said he understands that the Commissioners are only asking for the return of funds at the same ratio they were contributed, which would amount to about 70 percent of the reserve funds. He asked if the CAB doesn't think that's a fair distribution of the assets. Kukulski stated he assumes that's what the Commissioners want, but that has never been stated clearly. He said it's not an issue of fairness, it centers around the contract which states when one party pulls out of the group, you give up your claim to the assets. Boharski said despite the contract, if the Council feels dividing the assets in the way they were acquired, with 70 percent from the County and 30 percent from the cities, is fair and equitable, then there wouldn't be any reason to file a declaratory judgement. Kalispell City Council Minutes April2, 2001 Page 4 of 6 1752 Leistiko commented in his opinion, the majority of the Council feels the County shouldn't be able to take 70 percent of the reserve funds because that's not what the agreement says. He said he doesn't feel it puts the City in an adversarial position by asking a third party to settle the dispute. Haarr commented if the cities expect to get more than what they contributed, then they're probably looking at a Supreme Court decision. Kukulski said all the way through this process he has taken the Council's direction. He said "this legal stand isn't my legal stand I've recommended to you, it's the letter you received from our City Attorney some three months ago". Kukulski said the legal opinions from the three city's attorneys are the basis he's been working from. Scarff said he feels the Council is "making a mountain out of a mole hill". He said all they are asking for is someone sitting in the middle of the fence to make a decision. Scarff called for the question. The motion was seconded by Kenyon. Boharski stated before he entertains the motion, he wants to explain why he won't support the declaratory judgement. He said he still feels the issues can be worked out with the Commissioners and if the City starts down this road it will appear to be adversarial. Boharski added he doesn't feel the letter from the County's attorney is unreasonable, and even though it may not follow the letter of the agreement, he thinks the issues can be resolved without filing the judgement. Public Comment Jean Johnson, 787 North Main, said we have two bickering entities and no regard for the taxpayer. He said a good case could be brought that 70 percent of the money is County taxpayer's money. Johnson said the parties should sit down together and talk. Harm Toren, Columbia Falls, agreed, stating everyone should sit down and talk it out, then if an agreement can't be reached, file the suit. The motion carried upon roll call vote with Atkinson, Kenyon, Larson, Leistiko, Scarff and Van Natta voting in favor, and Haarr and Boharski voting against. MAYOR/COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS Kukulski said the audit report for the past fiscal year has been received. He said it's a positive audit with the City in good financial condition. Kukulski stated the staff is doing a good job of holding the line on the budgets, but the City is going to get hammered with the electricity issue and aging equipment. Atkinson commented a motion to call for the question during one part of the meeting was not acted on and he cautioned Council members to follow parliamentary procedure to maintain order. 1 1 Kalispell City Council Minutes April2, 2001 Page 5 of 6 1753 Boharski said the comment is duly noted, however, he would suggest only making a motion to call.for the question if there is a serious reason to do so in order to allow everyone a chance to discuss an issue. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m. —LiM.E.BrIhm'ski , Wm. E. Boharski Mayor ATTEST: eresa White City Clerk Approved April 16, 2001 1 Kalispell City Council Minutes April2, 2001 Page 6 of 6