1. There were no miscellaneous reports or announcements from neighborhood council representatives.

Interim Planning Director Bill Walters reported that Paul Vanhorn has submitted a petition to vacate 30th Street NW, a stub, dead-end, graveled roadway off of Central Avenue West. Mr. Vanhorn owns all three parcels currently abutting 30th Street NW. Staff has determined the right-of-way is not necessary for part of the functional street network and there is no possibility of ever extending 30th Street.

Mr. Walters requested that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9855 vacating 30th Street NW.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson declared the public hearing open.

No one spoke in support of or opposition to Resolution 9855.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9855, subject to the applicant causing the appropriate Amended Plat to be prepared, executed and filed.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Interim Planning Director Bill Walters reported that the owners of the block accommodating the Meadow Gold Dairies facility have submitted a petition to vacate 4th Alley South between 3rd and 4th Streets South. The Dairy has loading docks that open up on the Alley which often times is blocked with truck trailers being loaded and unloaded.

At a Planning Board meeting held July 14, 2009, the Planning Board recommended the City Commission vacate the involved portion of 4th Alley South and approve the accompanying Amended Plat.

Mr. Walters requested that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9857, vacating 4th Alley South, and approve the Amended Plat of Block 419, Original Townsite.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson declared the public hearing open.

Speaking in support of Resolution 9857 were:

Brett Doney, Great Falls Development Authority, residing at 3048 Delmar Drive, urged the Commission’s support of Resolution 9857. Meadow Gold Dairy is a long standing and important part of the industrial infrastructure. Passage of this resolution will facilitate its operation.

Mike Witsoe, 2612 1st Avenue South, commented that he drives by this alley every day. He commented that what Meadow Gold Dairy does for downtown and the business industry is excellent.

No one spoke in opposition to Resolution 9857.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9857, and approve the Amended Plat of Lots 1-14, Block 419, Great Falls Original Townsite and Vacated 4th Alley South and the accompanying Findings of Fact subject to fulfillment of the conditions stipulated by the Planning Board.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that this resolution, if approved, will allow the City to levy and assess properties that have outstanding utility payments due. The City reviews the outstanding amounts annually. This year it amounts to about $15,000 that still needs to be paid. Each of the property owners has received multiple notices, as well as notice of this public hearing.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson declared the public hearing open.

Speaking in support of Resolution 9860 was:

Kathleen Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, inquired if the County charges the City for the service, or charges interest on the lien to go towards recovering the cost. Ms. Balzarini responded that there is no direct charge for placing these liens on the properties. It is part of the annual assessment and taxing process, a service that the County does provide for the City. The County earns interest on monies in its account until it is remitted back to the City. The City receives a monthly remittance from the County.

Ms. Gessaman commented that it is kind of like a collection agency. Ms. Balzarini responded that it is a way to collect fees that are due and payable. Statutes and ordinances allow the City to place a lien against those properties that have incurred those expenses. She wouldn’t classify the County as a collection agency.

Ms. Gessaman asked if the City had a fee repayment process for non-property owners so that it didn’t have to go through the lien procedure. Ms. Balzarini responded that the City does have other processes available to make collections on outstanding accounts. Ultimately, the property owner is responsible for all sewer charges. The tenant is responsible for delinquent water charges.

Speaking in opposition to Resolution 9860 was:

Mike Witsoe, 510 11th Street South, inquired if the utility account gets too far behind would the services of water, sewer and garbage be cut off. Ms. Balzarini responded affirmatively. When the charges are assessed, Mr. Witsoe presumed that the majority of the bills were under $250. Ms. Balzarini responded that, in this case, the average charge is $300. There are some in the $1,500 dollar range. Mr. Witsoe commented that the property owner is assessed for the sewer, but the water and garbage charges are assessed against the renter. Ms. Balzarini responded that it depends. There are some rental owners that prefer to have all the bills directed to them in their name. In other instances the renter pays the bill, and the owner receives a copy of the bill. There are a number of different ways that the bills are paid. Each situation is looked at and evaluated. Mr. Witsoe inquired if an owner of a multiple rental building had some of the renters skip on the rent, water, sewer and garbage, if the City would put a tax lien on the property. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson clarified that this wasn’t a tax lien.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9860.

Motion carried 4-0.

Interim Planning Director Bill Walters reported that the City of Great Falls, through the adoption of Ordinance 3022 on November 5, 2008, enacted and approved the Great Falls International Airport Tax Increment Financing Industrial District. The Montana Department of Revenue, which is responsible for the certification of the Tax Increment Financing Industrial District, notified the City in May that the legal description for the International Airport Tax Increment Financing Industrial District was inaccurate. In addressing the issue over the past several weeks, the Airport’s consultant, who prepared the original description of the boundary of the Airport Tax Increment Industrial District, worked with representatives of the Montana Department of Revenue and City staff to correct the description reflected in Exhibit “A” attached to Ordinance 3043.

Mr. Walters requested that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3043.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson declared the public hearing open.

Speaking in support of Ordinance 3043 were:

Kathy Harris, Stelling Engineers, Inc., 614 Park Drive South, reported that Stelling is the consultant engineer for the Airport. She encouraged the Commission to recognize that the boundary description has changed for the district. Stelling has updated the boundary to correct a number of parcels that needed to be aligned with the Department of Revenue parcel boundaries. She believes the increment district is beneficial to the Airport as a way to subsidize future improvements for tax increment financing.

Brett Doney, Great Falls Development Authority, residing at 3048 Delmar Drive, commented that the GFDA supports the use of tax increment financing in a responsible manner to support economic development.

Speaking in opposition to Ordinance 3043 was:

Ron Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, inquired whether the consultant was paid twice to do this work – the original work and the revisions. Ms. Harris responded that Stelling was paid to assist the Airport in creating the tax increment financing district and to prepare the boundary description. After the discrepancy was discovered by the Department of Revenue, Stelling assisted the Department of Revenue and the City at no additional cost to the City. Stelling has worked with its client to correct that boundary and is also preparing a new legal boundary description for the Airport which will be coming before this Commission. She reported that Stelling was paid once to create the district and the reconciliation efforts didn’t increase the fee. She did clarify that there is a separate contract to redefine the Airport boundary which is fairly complicated and has been going on for some years.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3043.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioners Beecher and Rosenbaum, that the City Commission remove this item from the table and approve the prioritized list of projects attached as Exhibit A using the balance of tax increment funds remaining after final debt service payments are made from the Central Place Urban Renewal Revitalization Program.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners.

Commissioner Jolley requested that the vote for the $300,000 to reimburse the Economic Revolving Loan Fund be separate from the vote to transfer the money to the Great Falls Development Authority. Ms. Balzarini responded that the process that will be established will be brought back before the Commission, including using the GFDA as the pass through entity to re-loan this money. The Commission will be approving the release and the terms of the release to the GFDA.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquiries from the public.

Brett Doney, Great Falls Development Authority, residing at 3048 Delmar Drive, commented that this is a wonderful package that culminates two years of hard work by everyone involved in downtown. He believes it will make an enormous difference in downtown. This funds the top priorities of the Neighborhood Council, the Downtown Business Improvement District, the Great Falls Development Authority and City departments.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any further discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission remove from the table Resolutions 9858 and 9859, Ordinance 3040, the Amended Plat of Block 21 & Lots 1-10, Block 22, Highland Park Addition and Vacated Rights-of-Way, Findings of Fact and Annexation Agreement, all pertaining to said Amended Plat.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolutions 9858 and 9859, and approve the Amended Plat of Block 21 & Lots 1-10, Block 22, Highland Park Addition and Vacated Rights-of-Way, Findings of Fact and Annexation Agreement, all pertaining to said Amended Plat.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners.

Commissioner Rosenbaum commented that all the players have been in touch with each other, agreements were made and contractors can proceed.

Commissioner Jolley inquired if the zoning classification was changed at the last meeting. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson clarified that Resolutions 9858 and 9859 would be considered first with respect to the annexation and vacation, and then proceed to Ordinance 3040 with regard to the zoning classification.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquiries from the public.

Roy Volk, 301 Big Bend Lane, thanked the Commission for allowing him an extra two weeks. He and his wife had numerous meetings with City staff, engineers and the developers. The parties came to a reasonable resolution with regard to ingress and egress. He reported that the only thing pending was a storm drain issue that he will endeavor to work with the City to get resolved.

Motion carried 4-0.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3040.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any further discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Commissioner Beecher moved that the City Commission remove ordinance 3044, the Social Host Ordinance, from the table and adopt Ordinance 3044, as amended.

Motion failed for lack of a second.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was another motion. No one responded.

Commissioner Rosenbaum commented that, for lack of a second and lack of another motion, his understanding was the matter would remain on the table until the next meeting. Acting City Attorney Chad Parker responded that would be the case. If the motion to remove from the table fails, it would remain on the table to be brought back at a later date.

Commissioner Jolley commented that her understanding was if the matter was not removed from the table tonight, the matter was gone and the ordinance could be rewritten. Mr. Parker responded that was incorrect. The matter remains on the table. It has not been removed from the table as of this point and time.

Commissioner Rosenbaum commented that Commissioner Jolley mentioned she would like other language added that she shared with the Acting City Attorney. The other void here is the Mayor is absent. His personal view is this is a band-aid effect. It will be more punitive, but he doesn’t believe it will change significantly the behavior of the young people. Commissioner Rosenbaum would like the Mayor to be involved and to wait for a full commission. He doesn’t believe there is any level of urgency and would also like to hear comments from the public.

Commissioner Beecher disagreed. He pointed out that this Ordinance is focused at people that are encouraging, by their behavior, underage drinking. To him, it is closing another avenue that encourages drinking.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson stated that the matter remains on the table to be brought up at a subsequent meeting.

Public Works Director Jim Rearden reported that the purpose of this agreement is to hire a consultant to determine the availability of existing water rights that are available for sale, review and rank those rights and, should the City choose to proceed, assist in the purchase of water rights.
The issuance of a Request for Proposals that led to this agreement was approved by the City Commission at the November 18, 2008, regular meeting. A Request for Proposals was issued in February 2009 and five proposals were received. A team made up of Commissioner Bronson, City Manager Doyon, Coleen Balzarini and Mike Jacobson was chosen to interview the proposers and rank the firms. The firm of PBS&J was the committee’s unanimous choice. Staff also provided an update on the proposals at the July 7, 2009 Commission Work Session.

Again, this work would determine the availability of desirable water rights and prioritize those rights. The City would be left with the choice of whether to proceed with the purchase of water rights that are identified.

Staff recommends that the City enter into the Professional Services Agreement with the PBS&J engineering firm.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioners Beecher and Rosenbaum, that the City Commission approve the Professional Services Agreement with PBS&J and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquiries from the public.

Kathleen Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, commented that she believed Water Right Solutions was the City’s water consultant, had water rights to offer the City, and part of their scope of work was to prepare, analyze and research the acquisition of additional water rights. WRS had gone through about 2,585 different water right claims in the 41QJ basin. She was curious, with that database, why Water Right Solutions wasn’t in a position to do the study. She inquired if it was a conflict of interest with WRS since it was offering to sell water rights to the City.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that, if he understood her inquiry, she was wondering if Water Right Solutions did a thorough evaluation of water rights. It is his understanding WRS did not. The main reason the City is looking at someone in the alternative to do further work is because WRS does represent the party that had an interest in selling to the City and, therefore, there would have been a conflict in WRS being further involved in the evaluation process.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini added that she believed what Ms. Gessaman was referring to was that Water Right Solutions reviewed water rights within our basin in regards to whether those rights would cause the City any concern and any reason to file an objection to those water rights. That is a totally different process. Ms. Gessaman added that there is a database of people with water rights that may wish to sell those water rights. She inquired if that data would be used by the consultants. Mr. Rearden responded that the database is available to anyone. Even though the database is available, it hasn’t been analyzed to determine what is available and appropriate. Ms. Gessaman inquired if the City was still working with Water Rights Solutions as the contract hadn’t ended. Ms. Balzarini responded that Water Right Solutions still performs services for the City under certain terms. For instance, WRS is currently in the process of making a request for an additional point of diversion for another project. In this case, the City is asking PBS&J to perform this service because of the potential conflict mentioned.

Ron Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, stated that he believed before the City went out to look for a new water consultant, the City went out for bids for people to sell the City water rights. As he understands it, one bid was received. He asked who that bid was from and if the bid was opened. Mr. Gessaman commented that he had never heard of anybody doing a mail order solicitation for water rights. City Manager Doyon responded that the committee reviewed all the responses and determined PBS&J was the firm with the best credentials to perform the services for the City. Mail solicitation is one technique. Whether it will be employed here, he is not sure. The staff report mentions the sensitivity surrounding it. Mr. Doyon further noted that one bid was received as Mr. Gessaman mentioned. He doesn’t believe it has been opened because he believes staff was waiting to bring a consultant on board to review it. Mr. Gessaman believes the scope for the consultant has changed considerably and it seems strange to him. Speaking from an agricultural standpoint, Mr. Gessaman stated that he would never sell anybody his water rights.

Mike Witsoe, 2612 1st Avenue South, asked how much the contract costs. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that the information he seeks is in the agenda report. Mr. Rearden summarized that the agreement is broken down into five tasks. Task 1 is to identify the appropriate water rights that might work for the City - $14,000; Task 2 is to contact water right holders to determine if their rights might be available – $8,000 - $10,000; Task 3 is to evaluate and rank available water rights - $7,000 - $8,000. Tasks 4 and 5 are too speculative at this time because they involve negotiating the procurement of water rights.

Mr. Witsoe asked what the difference was between what Water Rights Solutions did and this company’s project. Ms. Balzarini answered that WRS reviewed all the water rights within our basin that may cause concern for the City’s exiting water rights during the adjudication process and made any determination and recommendation as to whether the City should object to any existing water rights. It has nothing to do with the valuation of new water rights; it has nothing to do with whether they are willing or open to considering sale; it has nothing to do with whether it is an active or inactive water right. It has nothing to do with those items that PBS&J will be looking at in terms of evaluating the City’s potential for purchasing new water rights.

Mr. Witsoe asked if PBS&J could use WRS’s information. Mayor Pro Tempore responded that the City is not starting on any particular path where people are not going to be able to get information that is already developed. Mr. Rearden added that the report is property of the City and available for PBS&J to utilize.

Mr. Witsoe asked and was responded to affirmatively that PBS&J is a Montana company and is based out of Missoula. Mr. Witsoe inquired what the start and completion dates were. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that as soon as the contract is approved, they will begin. Mr. Rearden added that the completion date will be dependent upon what is determined and found throughout the process.

Mr. Witsoe asked Ms. Balzarini what the City has spent with WRS in the last three years for the information to sell the City one set of water rights that is now considered a conflict of interest. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that Mr. Witsoe’s question assumes incorrect facts. Ms. Balzarini again explained that WRS reviewed the existing water rights to evaluate the paper right compared to the physical right to make sure that the City had clean water right documents as the City entered into the adjudication process. In addition to that, WRS has done work for the City in regards to the water reservation in assisting in establishing points of diversion and places of use for the Malting Plant, the proposed Highwood Station and Montgomery Energy. With regard to how much WRS was paid, Ms. Balzarini stated that she would have to gather that information to make available at a later date.

Brett Doney, Great Falls Development Authority, residing at 3048 Delmar Drive, urged that the process continue. He explained that it is a very deliberative process that began with WRS, then there were a number of work sessions with water masters and water right experts, and now the City is following the course that was recommended by those experts. The importance of having water available for potential industrial use down the road, as well as for the normal growth of the City, can’t be overstated.

Neil Taylor, 3417 4th Avenue South, commented that he believes the City is putting the cart before the horse. He noted that on May 6, 2008, agenda item 6, the Commission consummated a consulting agreement with Water Right Solutions to do exactly what is being asked of the new water consultant. He asked if the Commission was firing WRS, or changing the existing consulting agreement. Ms. Balzarini responded that the City has given WRS specific orders on specific projects as to what it is the City wants them to do. In this instance, as mentioned, because WRS represents one of the potential sellers of the water rights, it was determined to be more appropriate to use a third party consultant to evaluate any water rights that the City may choose to consider for purchase. WRS has specific tasks to do. This is not one of them. They did not have an exclusive agreement with the City of Great Falls.

Mr. Taylor disagreed and again cited the May 6, 2008, agenda item 6. Mr. Taylor suggested that the database of material is available to anyone, and that City staff do some of the work to save thousands of dollars. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that the information in the database is complex and needs to be evaluated by people with special expertise. Mr. Taylor disagreed, stating that he has done that type of work in the past and doesn’t see it as a great process to go through.

Anitra Hall, 3508 14th Avenue South, commented that prices are not attached to tasks 4 and 5. She asked if there was a financial cap on the contract. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that it is not an open ended contract. Items 4 and 5 would have to be separately negotiated and caps imposed at that time.

Motion carried 4-0.

Neighborhood Council Coordinator Patty Cadwell reported that it is recommended that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3045. The Great Falls Youth Council has been existing for one year with six active members. Its formation occurred as a result of a vision that actualized in the form of a Weed and Seed strategy. Weed and Seed personnel distributed applications to Great Falls High School, Charles M. Russell High School, Paris Gibson Education Center and Central Catholic High School. Twenty-one applications were received. There are six core members that plan to solicit other members in the future. These youth believe their input to the City Commission and their actions to improve youth involvement can positively influence the citizens of Great Falls. To date the Youth Counsel has conducted a survey of 500 high school students that they wish to present to the City Commission in the future. Youth Council also plans a video survey of residents of the Weed and Seed site. In addition, youth members plan to begin the process of establishing a Youth Center in Great Falls, a place where youth can gather for fun and learning. The Youth Council members recently attended a NeighborWorks USA Leadership Institute in Chicago through a partnership between Weed and Seed and Neighborworks Great Falls. The Youth Council will fall under the work load of the Neighborhood Council Coordinator and they will meet at least monthly.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners.

Commissioner Jolley inquired about the Youth Council falling under Ms. Cadwell’s workload, even though Weed and Seed and NeighborWorks are involved. Ms. Cadwell explained that Weed and Seed is involved in that it has set aside money for a project for the Youth Council. The Youth Council will fall under her supervision similar to the Neighborhood Councils. She can prepare the agendas for them, and act as a liaison between them, City staff and Commissioners.

Commissioner Jolley inquired about the wording in the Ordinance stating the Youth Council would fall under the Neighborhood Council Coordinator after the end of the Weed and Seed grant in 2010. Ms. Cadwell responded that she will be in charge after the creation of the Great Falls Youth Council.

Commissioner Jolley inquired about the annual election language in December, as it doesn’t say who votes. Ms. Cadwell responded that may be something that needs to be corrected.

Commissioner Jolley cited Garland’s Youth Council statement and thinks it’s wording seems less political to her. The first time she heard about a Great Falls Youth Council was in October during the Presidential election. The mission statement on the recruitment flyer stated “they want to be a catalyst for action, and a center for forward thinking and progressive thought.” To her, progressive thought is the opposite of conservative thought.

Commissioner Jolley commented that she is concerned with the shape the Neighborhood Councils are in because people aren’t signing up to be on Neighborhood Councils. She thinks that the Neighborhood Councils are already a lot of work for Ms. Cadwell. She also didn’t see anywhere on the Youth Council application for the parent to sign giving their permission. Commissioner Jolley commented that, as a City, she was leery being in any way responsible for minors. She stated again that her fears were about the workload, Weed and Seed money running out, and the City having an Ordinance that has a council that someone has to work with. She thought maybe the City wasn’t ready yet for a Youth Council.

Ms. Cadwell responded that she doesn’t recruit Neighborhood Council members and she won’t recruit Youth Council members. That is the job of citizens themselves and the councils once they are formed. That is not part of her job description. Community Development has never funded Neighborhood Councils so she can’t see why Commissioner Jolley would think the department would fund the Youth Council. There hasn’t been a promise to the Youth Council that the City would fund their activities. The Weed and Seed funds go to the Youth Council to do a project in the Weed and Seed area. She stated that she doesn’t share the same concerns as expressed by Commissioner Jolley.

As far as Commissioner Jolley’s concern regarding the political statement, she has no idea if there was any intention of progressive or conservative thought when the mission statement was proposed. Ms. Cadwell concluded that there are youth ready, willing and able to be a Youth Council for the City of Great Falls.

Commissioner Jolley inquired if Ms. Cadwell believed it wouldn’t be too much more work for her. Ms. Cadwell explained that it wouldn’t because the Weed and Seed operation is in the process of moving out of her office. There will be extra time to work with the youth.

Commissioner Jolley expressed that she would like to see the titles of the officers changed into “normal titles.” Ms. Cadwell responded that those titles came from the youth themselves. Part of the reason for this youth involvement was for them to come up with their own ideas, make their own mistakes, make changes, and rectify mistakes. The youth feel pretty strongly those are the titles they wanted to use. Commissioner Jolley responded that she also works with teenagers and she likes for them to learn from their own mistakes. But, she doesn’t have a City ordinance created with these kinds of titles. Teens are allowed to speak at any Neighborhood Council or City Commission meetings. She is concerned that there might be other priorities.

Commissioner Beecher moved that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3045 on final reading.

Commissioner Beecher requested clarification from staff whether the Ordinance states the Youth Council is an advisory council.

Commissioner Beecher moved to amend his motion, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Ordinance 3045 on final reading, creating the Great Falls Youth Council that would be an advisory council.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any further discussion amongst the Commissioners.

Commissioner Rosenbaum stated that it would be refreshing to have youthful, productive comments and youth involvement in government.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquiries from the public.

Tim Seery, 228 17th Avenue NW, stated that the Youth Council looks forward into opening up this new constituency of youth and being able to voice any of their concerns and perspectives that they might have on issues in the community relating to City government that are of direct importance to them. They look forward to this opportunity. Mr. Seery further commented that an Ordinance of this nature speaks volumes for the City of Great Falls in that it places a premium on the value of the young people, not just in this current generation, but in the ensuing generations. In response to three of Commissioner Jolley’s comments, Mr. Seery first remarked on the parent signature on the application. He commented that, although he believes it may be a beneficial addition, any other outside activities, hence their trip to Chicago, were signed off on separate release forms. So, if there were any separate activities that fall outside of simply membership, then those are on a separate document. With regard to the mission statement and the word “progressive,” Mr. Seery commented that he personally, with the help of the youth on the council, drafted the mission statement and there was no political agenda behind it. Progressive meaning that moving forward for Great Falls and moving towards improvements and benefits. With regard to the title names, Mr. Seery stated that he wholeheartedly agreed with Commissioner Jolley. He realizes it should have been changed before it reached this stage. However, he was unaware the wording was still in there because that was an addition that was brought about by the first Youth Council coordinator and seconded by the rest of the members of the Council. He agreed that should be amended to professional names.

Commissioner Jolley asked who votes at the election in December. Mr. Seery responded that it should state that in October the appointments are made because of the applications submitted. There are no elections, and the date of appointment is in October and not December. Commissioner Jolley asked who appoints. Mr. Seery responded that Patty Cadwell and the youth council members will review the applications and go through a selection process.

Ron Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, commented that about a year ago the Commission cut the youth out of the Neighborhood Councils by requiring that anyone who is elected to Neighborhood Councils must be a voter. He believed that to be a poor choice because members younger than 18 could have been elected to Neighborhood Councils if they had a sufficient interest, then the City wouldn’t need a special Youth Council to provide more advice.

Anitra Hall, 3508 14th Avenue South, stated that she is a student council sponsor of Great Falls High School. She appreciates the idea of establishing a Youth Council. Youth can attend City Commission and Neighborhood Council meetings, but they don’t do so. She doesn’t believe they feel welcomed. She doesn’t think they believe their voice would be heard. Giving them a structure that they organize and run will help them develop the leadership skills that they need to be civic minded adults. Ms. Hall sees this group as being a liaison to both high schools. This gives the students a voice with the City that they would not otherwise have. She urged the Commission’s adoption of this Ordinance.

Karen Grove, 1816 1st Avenue North, stated that she is a member of Neighborhood Council 8 and the Weed and Seed Steering Committee. They had a lot of discussion regarding this Youth Council. Everyone involved is excited that finally the youth are going to be involved in the process and have a chance to form that relationship working with adults on projects throughout the City. Ms. Grove commented that she thought the election language in December, meant the election would be for the six chair positions. She believes it is a great thing to involve the youth. Young thinking does nothing but improve the whole process of the City. She urged the Commission’s support of the Youth Council.

Mike Witsoe, 2612 1st Avenue South, agreed with Ms. Grove and Mr. Seery. Mr. Witsoe commented that the students of today are more knowledgeable. This will give them a chance to get involved. Mr. Witsoe also encouraged the Commission’s support.

In response to Commissioner Beecher, Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson noted that the establishment clause for this Ordinance refers to Article VII, Section 3 of the City Charter which discusses the power as a Commission to appoint advisory bodies. Because this organization is created pursuant to that article and section, it is strictly advisory and he doesn’t believe anything more needs to be added to the Ordinance. Secondly, as he also sits on the Steering Committee for Weed and Seed, this proposal has been germinating within Weed and Seed and other communities and student groups for quite some time. He believes he speaks for the Steering Committee that everyone there is enthusiastic about this proposal and wants to see it go forward. He certainly doesn’t see any nefarious goal such as bringing death panels or such things in there merely because someone chose to use the word "progressive" in the bylaws. He supports this proposal and, if amendments need to be made down the road to help them facilitate it, then so be it. To some extent, he would like to hear those ideas from the youth themselves.

Commissioner Jolley commented that she believes it was unnecessary for Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson to use the term "death panel." When she first heard about this in October, there was a direct quote from one of the Presidential candidates as a recruitment tool and she was just pointing that out. Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson responded that he was simply commenting about her concerns about the political make up of this were unwarranted. Commissioner Jolley responded that was his opinion.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that the Business Improvement District has been re-created for another 10 years. There is an annual assessment that is necessary to be levied against those properties within the district in order to operate and carry out the budget the Commission has already approved. This assessment will be approximately $172,000 for this year. Ms. Balzarini requested the Commission approve the assessment resolution.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9852.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that the Tourism Business Improvement District was created under the same statutory authority as the Business Improvement District. The TBID assessment methodology is different in that the TBID voluntary levy and collect from hotel occupants one dollar per night. It will then be remitted over through the assessment process to the TBID to attract sports activities and various conventions within the City of Great Falls.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9853.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that the Public Works Department is responsible for enforcing the nuisance weeds ordinance. Over the past 12 months, that department has issued 2,645 notices of weed violations to property owners. Of those that were noticed, 91 were required to have the weeds taken care of by the Public Works Department. Of those 91 properties, 37 remain unpaid. At this point there is $10,700 in unpaid weed cuttings. Ms. Balzarini requested the Commission’s approval so that the amount could be transferred over to liens on the properties through the County billing process.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9861.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquiries from the public.

Ron Gessaman, 1006 36th Avenue NE, inquired if the assessments were just for weed cuttings, or if it also included lawns. He stated that if this wasn’t for all weeds, it shouldn’t be labeled as such. Mr. Gessaman asked if the taxpayers could charge the City for cutting its weeds along some roads.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that this is an annual analysis that City staff performs. There is a revolving fund that has been established over the years to provide security for special improvement district debt that has been issued. Each year, staff looks at the individual special improvement districts to determine whether there is funds to make the next year’s debt service payments, and/or whether those funds are no longer required. At that point, they are recommended for closure into this larger SID revolving fund. The Commission has the opportunity to take any surplus within the fund and remit it over to the general fund. At this point, staff does not make that recommendation. The amount that is available is $169,000. It is used as security in general for all future special improvement debt that is issued as well. It has the potential for impacting interest rates on those special improvement districts when they are created. Staff believes it is adequate. It meets the IRS restrictions, as well as the State requirements for minimums.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9862.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Fiscal Services Director Coleen Balzarini reported that there are $750,000 in wastewater system revenue bonds that staff is asking the Commission to approve the issuance and fixing the terms and conditions on. The money is being offered through DNRC and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Of the $750,000, assuming the City has met all the terms and conditions, $359,300 will be charged at 1.75% interest and $390,700 will be forgiven. It is very beneficial to the City.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Rosenbaum moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission adopt Resolution 9863.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Senior Transportation Planner Andrew Finch reported that it was his pleasure to present the recommendation of the Great Falls Planning Board for approval of three projects for use of the 2009 transportation enhancement program funds that the City Commission receives each year. As in the past, the Planning Board did solicit proposals from the public and received a total of eight proposals this year totaling $660,000. That amount was almost twice the amount of available funds. The Planning Board members spent time listening to proposals from the applicants, reviewing and ranking the applications to come up with the best recommendations to bring forth. The three projects recommended for approval are the Gibson Park lighting, a City-wide bike route signage project and a First Avenue South streetscape project. The first project is approximately $103,000; the bike route signage is approximately $20,000, and the final project is approximately $206,000. Mr. Finch pointed out that the Planning Board did wish to fund the fourth ranked project, the 20th Street South sidewalk, as a very necessary project. The University of Great Falls suggested that it provide the match for construction of sidewalk on the east side of the street. The Planning Board recommends, should additional funds become available, that project should be considered by the Commission for funding at that time. Mr. Finch pointed out that additional funds would be coming available before the Commission to consider to allocation. Later this year, the Planning Board and staff will bring forth before the City Commission additional funds most likely in the amount of $750,000 to allocate to additional CTEP projects.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners.

Commissioner Rosenbaum asked if there has been an allocation of MACI money this year. It has been used for sidewalks in the past. Mr. Finch responded that air quality improvement funds are available for the Great Falls local area for expenditure on eligible projects. That is a separate process that follows through the Transportation Advisory Committee and the Policy Coordinating Committee. Those funds are available for sidewalk projects. He did mention that to the Planning Board that they may want to pursue that as well.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission approve the prioritized list of 2009 Community Transportation Enhancement Program projects, as recommended by the Planning Board.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners. No one responded.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any inquires from the public.

Brett Doney, Great Falls Development Authority, residing at 3048 Delmar Drive, believes this is a great package. He commended the City for all the projects that are happening. With regard to the stimulus funds, he stated he is aware of more than one potential private sector investment that could be made possible if it was matched with a CTEP project.

Mayor Pro Tempore noted that all of the Commissioners received an email from Aaron Weissman of Neighborhood Council 7 especially endorsing any support for the Gibson Park lighting project.

Motion carried 4-0.

Interim Planning Director Bill Walters reported that Forest Glen L.L.C. has applied to subdivide Lot 1A of Forest Glen South Subdivision, a vacant 6.38 acre parcel located along the west side of 26th Street South just north of the Centene office building. The applicant desires to subdivide Lot 1A into five lots and dedicate the existing road traversing the Lot, named Bobcat Way, as a public street. The involved property is presently zoned M-1, Mixed-Use District, which permits residential, light commercial, institutional and medical related uses. The Planning Board has recommended the City Commission approve the Minor Plat of Forest Glen South Business Park Addition and accompanying Findings of Fact.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Jolley moved, seconded by Commissioner Beecher, that the City Commission approve the Minor Plat of Forest Glen South Business Park Addition and the Findings of Fact.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

Interim Planning Director Bill Walters reported that Fred and Joan Maeder have applied to subdivide Lot 6, Block 3, Community Hall Addition, into two parcels. The applicants’ residence, addressed as 2025 2nd Avenue SW, is located on the westerly portion of the Lot and they desire to sell the easterly portion. The two proposed parcels meet the minimum required area of 15,000 sq ft in an R-1 zoning district, but variances are needed to accommodate the lot width and depth to width ratio for the one proposed lot. The Planning Board has recommended the City Commission approve the Amended Plat of Lot 6, Block 3, Community Hall Addition, the two requested variances and the accompanying Findings of Fact.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. No one responded.

Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the City Commission approve (1) the Amended Plat of Lot 6, Block 3, Community Hall Addition; (2) variances allowing a lot width of 64.10 feet and a depth to width ratio of 3.66 to 1 for proposed Lot 6B; and (3) Findings of Fact.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson asked if there was any discussion amongst the Commissioners or inquiries from the public. No one responded.

Motion carried 4-0.

City Manager Greg Doyon commended Mr. Seery’s public speaking ability.

Mayor Pro Tempore Bronson opened the meeting to Petitions and Communications.

With regard to what was asked by Mr. Dolman, Commissioner Beecher stated that the explanation has been up front and presented and enough has been said about it.

There being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Beecher moved, seconded by Commissioner Rosenbaum, that the regular meeting of September 1, 2009, be adjourned at 9:16 p.m.

Motion carried 4-0.

Minutes Approved: September 15, 2009