Loading...
* AgendaAGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA APPROVAL 1. Consent Agenda Approval A. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting February 16, 1998 B. Approval of Claims per Payables Register $290,303.39 7:00 P.M. MONDAY March 1, 1999 2. Hear the Public (Please see the back of Agenda for Manner of Addressing the Council) 3. City Service Request for Urban Renewal Funds - Westbrook Square Project 4. Resolution 4448 - Resolution Adopting a Proposed Amendment to the City -County Master Plan (Lincoln Proposal) Resolution 4448A - Resolution Rejecting a Proposed Amendment to the City -County Master Plan (Lincoln Proposal) 5. Resolution 4449 - Waterford Annexation 6. Resolution 4450 - Extension of Services Policy 7. Ordinance 1304 - Ordinance Establishing Municipal Court Filing Fees - 1 st Reading 8. Approval - City Manager Contract 9. Approval - City's Participation in Business Improvement District 10. Approval - Addendum to 9-1-1 Interlocal Agreement 11. Discussion - Ethics Review Request 12. Discussion of Legislative Bills 13. Appointments - Airport Advisory Board 14. Council Comments/Information/Questions (no action) FOR YOUR INFORMATION Council Work Session - March 8, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Next Regular Council Meeting - March 15, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. Council Work Session - March 22, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA MEMORANDUM March 1, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Al Thelen, Interim City Manager Agenda Item No. 1. Consent Agenda - Included in your packet is the Consent Agenda, consisting of the following: A) The Council Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of February 16, 1999 is included for your review and approval. B) The Approval of Claims per Payable Register in the Amount of $290,303.39 is included for your review and approval. Agenda Item No. 2. Hear the Public Agenda Item No. 3. City Service Request for Urban Renewal Funds - Westbrook Square Project The Staff has reviewed the list of improvements that City Service submitted in their letter of January 14, 1999 and concluded that $33,775 of these improvements will be located in the public right-of-way. I contacted City Service and offered to prepare a Developers Agreement and recommend that the City fund the same from the West Side Urban Renewal Project. City Service indicated that they want the City Council to act on the improvements listed in their January 14th letter totaling $124,923.12. As indicated in my February 11, 1999 memo, (a copy is included in the agenda packet), under past procedures we have not reimbursed a developer for on -site work Post Office Box 1997 • Kalispell, Montana 59903-1997 Telephone (406) 758-7700 • FAX (406) 758-7758 performed by the developer. The City Service letter includes $76,913.12 of on -site improvements already completed that I do not think are eligible costs. On the other hand, I indicated that $47,980 of items listed in the January 14th letter were items that were typical of the things that we have paid for in the Downtown Urban Renewal area. Jim Hansz' review of the plans and costs of these items has reduced that amount to $33,775, primarily due to the elimination of improvements on private property. City Service wants the City Council to act on their letter. It is my recommendation that the items and amounts in Jim Hansz' letter of February 18, 1999 be approved by Council and a Developers Agreements be prepared accordingly. The City Service letter of February 18, 1999 is also in the agenda packet and this letter requests that either City Service, or the City, be responsible for the construction of the improvements on private property and in the public right-of-way. We agree and propose that once it is determined what the City is to pay for, that the City should reimburse City Service for the City's share. This can be included in the Developers Agreement. City Service has said that the City did not make a distinction between improvements on private property or public property. We are dealing with public funds and the City has not paid for improvements on private property and in my judgment, we do not have the authority to pay for private improvements. A motion to identify the improvements that the City is to pay for is in order. Whatever expenditure is authorized by the Council will need to be subject to a Budget Amendment. (A copy of Resolution 4447, adopting a policy for West Side Urban Renewal funds is located at the end of this agenda memorandum) 19 Agenda Item No. 4. Resolution 4448 - Resolution Adopting a Proposed Amendment to the City -County Master Plan (Lincoln Proposal) Resolution 4448A - Resolution Rejecting a Proposed Amendment to the City -County Master Plan (Lincoln Proposal) This request by William Lincoln involves approximately 135 acres. The change requested in the Kalispell City -County Master Plan is from "Open Space and Suburban Residential" to "Resort Commercial" to facilitate the development of the site as the Two Rivers RV Resort. The Planning Staff recommended that the request be denied. The Planning Commission denied the request on a vote of five in favor and three opposed. The County Commission voted on February 22 to approve the request to amend the Kalispell City -County Master Plan. City Attorney Glen Neier sent a letter to the County on February 3rd (a copy is in your packet) advising them that action on this request by the City to approve the Master Plan change would not commit the City to provide utility service to the area. A motion to approve Resolution 4448 or approve Resolution 4448A is appropriate. Agenda Item No. 5. Resolution 4449 - Waterford Annexation Resolution No. 4449 annexes certain real property adjacent to the Summit Ridge Subdivision between Four Mile Drive and Summit Ridge Drive. The property in question is the location for a proposed retirement center by The Waterford. A request to annex said property has been received from the current owners of the property and the matter has been before the Kalispell City -County Planning Board and Zoning Commission, which recommended annexation. 3 The Waterford made an application for a zoning amendment concurrently with the application for annexation. The application anticipates a Planned Unit Development overlay of the R-4 and RA-1 zones requested. A Planned Unit Development will require a development agreement, adopted by Ordinance, specifying the bulk and dimensional parameters, site conditions, and construction phasing/sequencing. As of this date, Waterford has not reached a point in the process where a development agreement can be reduced to writing. We anticipate having a development agreement for Council consideration in about 30 days. Resolution No. 4449 has a delayed effective date so that the annexation and PUD zoning may take place simultaneously. A motion to approve Resolution 4449 is appropriate. Agenda Item No. 6. Resolution 4450 - Extension of Services Policy The City Council requested a review of the current policy relating to the extension of City utilities to properties outside the City. Public Works Director Jim Hansz and Planning Director Tom Jentz have recommended language changes and an addition to the Extension of Services Policy that will require properties to be contiguous to the City in order to be annexed and receive City utility service, along with language that will require plats desiring to annex and receive City utility service to use the City's subdivision design standards rather than the counties' design standards. These recommendations will improve the extension service policy. A motion to approve Resolution 4450 is appropriate. 0 Agenda Item No. 7. Ordinance 1305 - Ordinance Establishing Municipal Court Filing Fees - 1" Reading This ordinance will establish fees for the City's Municipal Court at a level between the fees for Justice Court and District Court. A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading is in order. Agenda Item No. 8. Approval - City Manager Contract This is a contact for Chris Kukulski to become the Kalispell City Manager. The contact is for a two year term at a salary of $60,000 per year. Fringe benefits include a $400 per month car allowance, and a 10% contribution for retirement. Vacation and sick leave are consistent with prior manager contacts. A motion to approve the contact is in order. (A copy of the contact is included the agenda packet) Agenda Item No. 9. Approval - City's Participation in Business Improvement District The downtown property owners have requested the City to sign a petition for the creation of a Downtown Improvement District. City property located in the district represents approximately 11.18% of the property in the district. Approximately 40% of the owners have signed the petition and 60% is required under the law. A motion to authorize the Mayor to sign the petition on behalf of the City is appropriate. Agenda Item No. 10. Approval of Addendum to 9-1-1 Interlocal Agreement The City of Whitefish has proposed an Addendum to the 911 Interlocal Agreement that has previously been approved. County Attorney Jonathan Smith recommends that the addendum, which will eliminate the Section on Cost Distribution and part of the Indemnity Section, be approved, as this will clarify some ambivalent language in 5 the agreement. Our City Attorney agrees with County Attorney Smith. A motion to approve the addendum is in order. Agenda Item No. 11. Discussion - Ethics Review Request On January 4, 1999 the City Council received a request to create an Ethics Review Board under Section 2-2-144 of the State Statutes. Section 5A of the statute states in part that "a local government may establish a three member panel to review complaints alleging violations of the statute by officers or employees of the local government." The members of the panel may not be officers or employees of the local government. The use of the statute adopted in 1995, is optional. Based on my limited research and inquiry with the Montana League of Cities and Towns, this statute has never been used in a Montana City or Town. My 35 years experience in local government has convinced me that the board that is most capable of reviewing the conduct of the elected City Councilpersons is the City Council itself The voters, of course, have an opportunity to review the conduct of local elected officials at election time. The creation of an independent Ethics Review Board for elected City officials is not a good idea and can itself be a divisive board. I urge the City Council to reject this concept. A motion to direct staff to inform the person that made this suggestion as to the position of the City Council on this subject is in order. Agenda Item No. 12. Discussion of Legislative Bills Enclosed is a memo that I received from Alec Hanson on Thursday. I will have a copy of the bills he identifies in the memo available for discussion on Monday night. Agenda Item No. 13. Appointment of Airport Advisory Board Members The Mayor has requested that this item be placed on the agenda. Agenda Item No. 14. Council Comments/Information/Questions — (no action) 7