Loading...
** Agenda MemoKALISPELL CITY COUNCIL Agenda ovemb►er 25,1996 AGENDA ITEM I - AGENDA APPROVAL A. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting November 18, 1996 B. Approval of Claims per Payables Register C. Bid Award North Water Well BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION:. Bids were opened on November 20th for the well drilling phase of this project. The project consists of two each 12 inch diameter, 500 feet deep wells. We have received two bids. One is below the estimate of $246,630 and one is above. We are currently reviewing the bids and will be meeting next week with the low bidder to discuss their qualifications and bid. RECOMMENDATION: For the work shop, we will not have our recommendation but we will have the recommendation in your regular council meeting information packets. ACTION REQUIRED: The recommendation will be forthcoming at the Council Meeting. A MOTION to approve the bid with an authorization to proceed will be required for the staff to continue this project. AGENDA ITEM 3 - HEAR THE PUBLIC (for December 2 Council MeetinZ agenda only) Agenda -November 25, 1996 BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: This item is the completion of the Ashley Park Zoning Change that was approved on the first reading at the November 18 Council Meeting. If approved, this would make the zoning district for the Ashley Park area City R-4 residential. RECOMMENDATION: As stated in the previous report, all of the City and Planning requirements have been fulfilled. The Staff and FRDO have both recommended approval of the zoning changes. I concur with the recommendations. ACTION REQUIRED: Final reading of ORDINANCE 1252 is required to complete this change. 41TUTIre AGENDA ITEM 6 - AIRPORT AUTHORITY DISCUSSION (work session only) BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: In response to the proposed change to an Airport Author,ity, the Airport Advisory Board has expressed concern about the need for a budget, direction, and formal change over to an Airport Authority. They have requested a meeting with the Council to discuss the transaction and all factors that this includes. I am concerned about several items related to this potential change in the airport operation. In general terms, the following are major areas to be considered: 1. Council's loss of Authority, other than the "bottom line" budget. With an Authority, all daily operations and decisions are no longer in the hands of the elected officials - directly or indirectly. Upon the change to the Authority, the City Council will approve the budget but you will no longer have any control over the use of the budget and other assets. 2. Supervision of day Ito day operations will be completely under the control of the Authority. 3. Land control questions need to be reviewed and properly addressed. This directly affects the T.I.F. area and the potential TIF proceeds. We need to "nail down" this economic question prior to any potential change in operations. I Agenda -November 25, 1996 4. We need to delay any changes in Authority until, as a suggestion, June 30, 1997. During that period we can research and further discuss the options available and ramifications of the change of control from the Council to an Authority. 5. During the interim, to assist the Airport Advisory Board, we should begin procedures to lease the airport property in parcels to business or individuals interested in the property at the airport. This could begin a revenue stream for offsetting the expenses of the airport questions. Until there is a firm revenue stream, an airport manager cannot be hired. 6. A° final determination of the Haven Field disposition must be completed before we move forward with any potential change. Without the Haven Field project, without the ballfield project, without a Daley Field sale, the airport property use and Authority must be revisited and probably altered to utilize the land that we currently own. RECOMMENDATION: The Airport Advisory Board is frustrated and concerned about the future of the airport and potential projects. However, at this time, I do not believe we can give them any real satisfaction other than listening and reinforcing your support for the airport and future projects (if economically possible). PI PA F L61 owl �, This item is not an action item at this time. Discussion and general direction for the staff would be of assistance. We may desire to make an official extension of the Airport Authority to June 30, 1997 in one of the future council meetings. -IRE" WIM, AGENDA ITEM 7 HAVEN FIELD -DISCUSSION OF RE -OFFERING BACKGROUND/CONSIDERATION: The bids were advertised for opening on Tuesday, November 19 at 11:30 a.m. Although we had several developers /realtors take out the offering documents, we received only one bid. That bid was not responsive to the public notice and offering requirements. Two major deficiencies were evident: 1. The bid was not responsive in terms of the minimum value required. 2. The bid did not include the bid security/earnest money that was required. Since this was a specified bid procedure, the bid did not meet the required minimum, and the earnest money was not included. The City Attorney and I concur that we must reject the current bid. Mr. Gallagher is in active discussion with the bidder to determine further interest for the purchaseof the property. Our options•are: 1 Do nothing - the bid is rejected and we have no further process. The land stays as is. The State lease would not be processed. The ballfield complex would not proceed due to lack of funding. The airport improvements/changes could not proceed due to lack of funding. 2. Re -advertise and re -offer the land in the same method as was just completed. This would include the same specifications for minimum values for the .3110M.9 land but add the authority for the staff to negotiate with the interested parties. 3. Re -advertise and re -offer the land at a lower, minimum value. We should also retain the right to negotiate with the interested party with this option. If the current bidder is not interested in resubmitting a bid, Options 2 and 3 may not be valid options. We hope to be able to report to you.,at the work session.what their interest level is. RECOMMENDATION: I currently cannot give you my final recommendation until we determine the level of interest. However, I tend to lean toward Option 2 with the flexibility to negotiate a settlement that is reasonable and acceptable to us. ACTION REQUIRED: Direction to the staff will be needed. At a minimum, a re -advertisement will be needed to proceed under Options 2 and 3.