Community Development Director Mike Rattray reported that as prescribed by OCCGF 8.49, a "Notice of Public Hearing" before the City Commission was posted on the property on August 5, 2005, and published in the Great Falls Tribune on August 6, 2005. There had been three citations issued and no response from the owner. He added that Resolution 9510 would enable Community Development staff to hire a contractor and abate the ongoing nuisance at 2304 8th Avenue North.

Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open. No one appeared to speak in support of or opposition to Resolution 9510. Mayor Gray declared the public hearing closed.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9510.

Motion carried 5-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that adoption of Resolution 9509 established the intent to assess the properties benefiting from the improvements financed through the sale of SID 1301 bonds. Resolution 9491 would levy and assess an assessment upon properties within the boundaries of Special Improvement District 1301.

The total anticipated costs of bonding, engineering and capital construction is $967,061. A portion of the costs are to be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds, which are to be payable primarily from special assessments to be levied against Lots 1 and 5, Medical Tech Park, which property would be specifically benefited by the improvements in an amount not less than $630,000. Costs of the improvements in excess of the costs to be assessed against Lots 1 and 5 would be paid from a contribution by the City in the amount of $337,061. This contribution is a payment in advance of an amount equal to the amount of the assessment (excluding there from the proportionate amount of underwriter's discount and Revolving Fund contribution) that would have been levied against the other parcel in the District, described as Medical Tech Park, Lot 1B, Cascade County, Montana and comprising 8.047 acres. The Assessment List included within Resolution 9491 shows the total individual cost per lot within the district based on the square foot method. Assessment payments are divided into 30 equal semi-annual principal and interest payments which will be due on November 30, 2005, through 2020, and May 31, 2005, through 2020.

Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open. There being no one to speak in support of or opposition to Resolution 9491, Mayor Gray declared the public hearing closed.

Commissioner Hinz moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9491, Final Levy of Special Assessments on property within the district for the purpose of financing the cost of certain off-site infrastructure improvements benefiting the Medical Technical Park.

Motion carried 5-0.

Planning Director Ben Rangel reported that staff has reviewed and addressed comments received during the Land Development Code public hearing held on August 2, 2005, including comments received by email or phone. It was recommended the Commission direct staff to amend the proposed Code with any amendments desired by the Commission. It was further recommended that if the Commission desired additional time to consider Ordinance 2923, to close or continue the public hearing and schedule action for September 6, 2005.

Ordinance 2923 would amend the Official Code of the City of Great Falls (OCCGF) to create "Title 17 - Land Development Code" which would include a new and updated set of guidelines, requirements and standards to help govern zoning and physical growth and development within the City of Great Falls.

The proposed Code would combine all land development provisions into one portion of the OCCGF and would be called, "Title 17 - Land Development Code." In general, this effort would result in the following:

1. Updated definitions;
2. Updated administrative & enforcement procedures;
3. Updated zoning districts, uses, and standards;
4. Updated sign standards;
5. Updated subdivision and platting standards;
6. Updated parking and landscaping standards;
7. Updated floodplain and storm water management standards, and,
8. New provisions for transportation facilities, outdoor lighting, hillside development, and erosion control during site development.

The draft Code has been available for public review and comment since unveiling at the October 2004 open house. During that time, it has been available for viewing and downloading on the City of Great Falls website at www.ci.great-falls.mt.us. Copies of the draft Code and zoning map have also been available for review at the Great Falls Public Library, as well as at the Planning Office in the Civic Center.

Mayor Gray asked what direction the Commission wanted to take. Commissioner Rosenbaum suggested taking further comments from the public and making any amendments needed.

Mayor Gray declared the public hearing open. John Martin, 1101 Durango Drive, representing Easter Seals/Goodwill, thanked staff for working with everyone and that he supported the Ordinance.

John Cameron, Code enforcement technician for the City, suggested three changes to be made to the sign code. The first one being; the use of balloons to be allowed. The car dealerships use balloons to promote sales. Second, clarifying the language of reader board signs. The reader board signs should be allowed but banned from flashing. Third, the language of grandfather signs needed to be clarified. He added that grandfather exemption should be restricted to signs that do not encroach on the public right-of-ways or a neighbor's property.

Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz asked Mr. Cameron to provide a copy of the changes he requested to the Commission.

Melody Brown, representing Great Falls Association of Realtors, 1019 9th Street South, stated they supported the amended version of the Land Development Code. She added the realtors were thankful to City staff for taking the time to look into their concerns they had presented to the Commission. Mayor Gray thanked her and the other realtors for working with staff on the issues that were brought forth.

Phyllis Hemstad, 106 6th Street Northwest, Neighborhood Council 2, thanked staff for their time that was put into the Land Code and for some of the issues that had been resolved. The Neighborhood Council was satisfied with the amended version of the code. She added that the parks should still be listed by themselves and that open spaces should not be a part of the parks. She gave an example of the cemetery being open space and it is the same color on the map as parks. She suggested that the parks do need to be a color contrast of their own on the map.

John Harding, 2709 Clover Drive, representing the Great Falls Home Builders, stated that he and the homebuilders looked forward to working with Commissioner Rosenbaum in an attempt to work through the hillside height restrictions. Commissioner Rosenbaum stated that it should be a fairly easy process.

Art Vender, 1606 8th Avenue South, stated that if his business was totally destroyed, his insurance would cover to rebuild only if it was at the same location. If he had to relocate his business elsewhere, the insurance would only cover a portion of the cost. He added that the new zoning would not allow him to rebuild on the current site. He asked who would make up the difference in his loss.

Dona Stebbins, 811 8th Avenue North, commended Planning Director Ben Rangel and staff for the quick response to the issues that had been brought up and amending the language in the code where the realtors had concerns. She asked about the concern of business owners regarding window signage. The way the code was written, a business owner seemed required to hire an electrician when replacing the face of a sign. She asked for clarification on the language. Community Development Director Mike Rattray stated if there was electricity attached to the sign, a sign electrician would be required to replace the panel due to the fact a lot of the signs were old and needed to have their wiring updated. If it was just replacing a non electric sign face, an electrician was not required.

Stuart Lewin, 615 3rd Avenue North, commended staff for an excellent job working with the Neighborhood Councils. He also recommended three items to the Commission to consider. First, having the corporation that was hired with the creation of the code to review the changes to make sure the appropriate language was used. Second, before passing the land code, take it over to the County Commission for review. He added that the County was currently in the process of creating a zoning code. Third, the opportunity was missed for the overlay district of the Missouri River Corridor Plan.

Mr. Lewin suggested that Mayor Gray recuse himself from voting on the Ordinance due to the fact of Mayor Gray owned property that would benefit from of the passing of the Ordinance.

John Popa, 4001 Huckleberry Drive, thanked the staff for the changes on the nonconforming issues that the realtors had mentioned. He added that the City had no business setting height limit restrictions. He stated that he otherwise supported the Ordinance.

Joe Aline, 1016 34th Avenue Northeast, developer, stated that the hillside development standards needed to be removed from the code. If the homebuyer knows up front there is no height restriction in the area they are looking to buy, that would eliminate any lawsuits. He also stated that he did not see a problem with a 30 foot curb cut. Mr. Aline added that when they sell a lot, they do not guarantee a view to the buyer and that it was the developer's responsibility to let buyers know if there were any height restrictions.

Sharon Kiffe, 2005 Mountain View Drive, stated that the view was a value factor for lots and homes. She added that setting height restrictions would not stop the growth of the City and that City rules should be enforced for the good of all the citizens. She also mentioned that she did not see how the Commission could come up with a compromise when only meeting with a committee from one side who were encouraging no height restrictions. She would be happy to attend any meeting to support the height restriction.

Mayor Gray stated that Commissioner Rosenbaum would be meeting with the developers and homebuilders to come up with a compromise on hillside height restrictions. Commissioner Rosenbaum will bring the information he receives to the Commission for further discussion.

Larry Geske, Great Falls, stated that he worked with the Mountain View homeowners to protect their views. He added that he sent a registered letter to homeowners when a lot in front of their home became available for purchase. This would give the homeowner a chance to purchase the lot to prevent any development in front of their home that would cause them to lose their current view. Mr. Geske stated that same homeowners in Berkner Heights purchased the lots in front of them to avoid any further development and not to lose their view.

Gloria Smith, 8 Cheyenne Drive, stated that the City had to have restrictions on view lots. She added that homes being advertised state that it is on a view lot. Homebuyers are paying for view lots and that height restrictions were needed to keep the homebuyers from losing their view. She added that she supported most of the code.

There being no one further to speak in support of or opposition to Ordinance 2923, Mayor Gray declared the public hearing closed.

Commissioner Hinz moved, seconded by Commissioners Beecher and Rosenbaum, that the City Commission continue the public hearing and schedule action on Ordinance 2923 for September 6, 2005.

Commissioner Hinz stated that she supported the Land Development Code and wanted it to be a document for the people. Mayor Gray reminded the Commission that there were investment decision being held up until the code is passed. Commissioner Rosenbaum stated that there were issues that needed to be worked on. He added that the City was doing well with the new code. Mayor Gray stated that they would direct staff to incorporate the amendments. Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz asked staff to review any new issues and provide the Commission with responses before the next Commission meeting. Planning Director Ben Rangel agreed.

Motion carried 5-0.

City Manager John Lawton reported that the City received the taxable valuation for the City of Great Falls from the Department of Revenue. Accordingly, the City can now compute and set its annual mill levy. He added that Great Falls was the lowest among other cities with the property tax levy and also the lowest in general fund expenditures.

The proposed mill levy is 138.27 mills, which provides for the same mills levied in the previous year plus:

• a 1.25 percent tax levy increase as allowed by MCA 15-10-420 for inflation;
• tax revenue growth from the $2,828,030 in newly taxable property resulting from new construction; and,
• a levy of an additional 3.87 mills for the "Permissive Medical Levy" allowed under 15-10-420(5)(b).

The public hearing on our Intent to Increase Property Taxes by 4.5 percent was held on July 5, 2005, in accordance with MCA 15-10-203.

The total mill levy for 2005 is 138.27 mills totaling $9,486,705. This included a levy of 3.87 mills for soccer park debt service payment which was $265,521 of the $9.4 million.

The total mill levy for 2004 was 131.64 mills totaling $8,737,999. The differences between the mill levy of $9.4 million and $8.7 million are:

• $355,678 for newly taxable property,
• $127,225 for inflation and changes in revenue from the state; and,
• $265,525 increase in the "Permissive Medical Levy".

MCA 15-10-202 requires the Montana Department of Revenue to send certification to each taxing authority of the total taxable value within the jurisdiction of the taxing authority by the first Monday of August.

The statement and the certified millage are necessary for the City to determine compliance with MCA 15-10-420.

MCA 7-6-4036, Fixing tax levy, provides:

1. The governing body shall fix the tax levy for each taxing jurisdiction within the county or municipality:
   1. by the later of the second Monday in August or within 45 calendar days after receiving certified taxable values;
   2. after the approval and adoption of the final budget; and
   3. at levels that will balance the budgets as provided in 7-6-4034.
2. Each levy:
   1. must be made in the manner provided by 15 10 201; and
   2. except for a judgment levy under 2 9 316 or 7-6-4015, is subject to 15 10 420.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Hinz, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9496.

Motion carried 5-0.

Fire Chief McCamley reported that Resolution 9513 honors Chief Charles C. Carrico who had the vision and dedication to build four new fire stations and a fire training center in the City of Great Falls. To this day, none of these buildings honor his accomplishments. Therefore, the City of Great Falls and Great Falls Fire Rescue would like the Fire Training Facility dedicated as the Charles C. Carrico Regional Facility in his memory.

Serving as Fire Chief from 1955 to 1970, Charles Carrico left a legacy that continues to be evident today. He was integral in the planning, design, and funding of four new fire stations and the Great Falls Fire Training Facility. This monumental project was completed a year after his retirement, and his efforts were never formally recognized.

After Chief Carrico's passing, his family carried on his memory by developing the Carrico Foundation, which donated more then $200,000 to Great Falls Fire Rescue to train and equip advanced life support engine companies.

The City would like to properly recognize this man and his family by dedicating the Fire Training Facility in his name. A dedication ceremony will take place on August 18, 2005, at the Charles C. Carrico Regional Training Facility.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioners Jovick-Kuntz and Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9513.

Motion carried 5-0.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz, that the City Commission accept the Consent Agenda as printed.

Motion carried 5-0.

At the June 21, 2005, City Commission meeting, six members were appointed to the Great Falls Planning Advisory Board. One member was appointed at the July 5, 2005, City Commission meeting. The Board still had openings for two more members.

The Great Falls Planning Advisory Board was created in lieu of the Great Falls City-County Planning Board. Further, the advisory board has jurisdiction within the City limits; consists of nine citizen members appointed by the City Commission; and performs and provides the duties, services and functions specified in Ordinance 2913, generally involving growth policies, subdivision applications and plats, annexation applications, zoning and rezoning petitions, conditional use permits, long range planning, transportation planning, Community Transportation Enhancement Program administration, historic preservation services, etc.

Commissioner Hinz moved, seconded by Commissioner Jovick-Kuntz, that the City Commission appoint Joshua S. DeNully and Mark James Gunderson to the Great Falls Planning Advisory Board for terms through December 31, 2007.

Motion carried 5-0.

Phyllis Hemstad, 106 6th Street NW, Neighborhood Council 2, stated she had received a complaint from one of the neighbors regarding the number of vehicles parked in the city street in front of an apartment complex. She asked if there was a limit on the number of vehicles allowed per resident. Community Development Director Mike Rattray stated that there was no limit or restriction on the number of vehicles parked in the street as long as they have current licenses. He added to file a complaint, contact Jay Parrot from Community Development and he would investigate the situation.

Mayor Gray acknowledged the candidates for the upcoming election: Dona Stebbins candidate for Mayor; John Stevens and Stuart Lewin, candidates for Commissioner.

He also commented on the reinterment of Paris Gibson's two children at the ceremony at Highland Cemetery and how it was a touching and joyous ceremony reuniting the Gibson family.

Mayor Gray stated that he had volunteered for a police ride-along with our local police. He added that he was able to see the dog team in action and was impressed with the work that they perform. He encouraged anyone interested in riding along with a police officer to do so. It is a good experience.