REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NOVI

MONDAY, JULY 24, 1995 AT 8:00 p.m. EDT

COUNCIL CHAMBERS - NOVI CIVIC CENTER - 45175 W. TEN MILE ROAD

The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. with Mayor McLallen presiding.

Council pledged allegiance to the flag.

ROLL CALL: Council Members Crawford (present), Mason

(present), Mitzel (present), Pope (Absent/

excused), Schmid (present), Toth (present)

and Mayor McLallen.

Present (6) Absent/excused (1-Pope)

-ooo-

ALSO PRESENT: Craig Klaver - Assistant City Manager

Dennis Watson - Assistant City Attorney

Brandon Rogers - Planning Consultant

Jim Wahl - Director of Community Development

Joe Kapelczak - JCK & Associates

Linda Lemke - Landscape Architect

Geraldine Stipp - City Clerk

-ooo-

Mayor McLallen called for an Executive Session to immediately follow the meeting to discuss pending litigation as Item 16.

Councilman Mitzel requested that Item #8 be moved to Item #1 due to the number of people.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the agenda be approved as amended.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

WHEREAS, it is deemed important that communities strive

to build a spirit of cooperation between business,

industry and residents; and

WHEREAS, the importance of community theme festivals

has been demonstrated for years as Novi and numerous

other cities around the United States have focused on

promoting theme festivals that provide a common cause

for community cooperation and celebration; and

WHEREAS, the City of Novi is presenting the 8th Annual

Michigan 50's Festival, July 26-30, an event that has

been and will be enjoyed for years to come; and

WHEREAS, the Novi Community shares the spirit of the

Festival as businesses, residents and community service

groups come together to promote Novi in a positive

light for the tens of thousands of visitors during the

Michigan 50's Festival Week;

WHEREAS, this annual event not only offers fun and

entertainment for festival goers, but a way for all

community service groups to conduct fund raisers for

their favorite charities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Novi is

proud to be involved in the excitement being generated

during the five day Michigan 50's Festival; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that I, Kathleen S. McLallen,

hereby proclaim the week of July 26th as Michigan 50's

Festival Week in the City of Novi.

Mayor McLallen presented the Proclamation to Bob McCann.

Mr. McCann accepted the Proclamation and stated that they had worked for this week all year long. He invited everyone to join in the festival and the entertainment.

RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION - Sheila Ann O'Sullivan - Girl Scout

Gold Award

WHEREAS; in 1980, the Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. established

the Girl Scout Gold Award for Senior Girl Scouts which is the

Highest achievement in the Girl Scout program, and

WHEREAS; Scout Sheila Ann O'Sullivan, a member of the Girl

Scouts of the U.S.A., Troop 1027 and the North Atlantic Girl

Scouts, London, England, for 10 years, has completed all of

the requirements which include helping a scout develop skills,

practice leadership, explore career possibilities and discover

more about oneself, and

WHEREAS; Sheila Ann O'Sullivan will be the third Novi Girl

Scout to obtain the Girl Scout Gold Award, the highest rank

achievable in Girl Scouting, and

WHEREAS; Sheila's Gold Award Project of planning and organizing an International Girl Scout/Girl Guide Booth for her school's International Festival helped her school and community learn about the Scout/Girl Guide programs

around the world. Sheila also promoted the "Peace Pack"

project to aid refugee children. This Gold Award Project

helped to show the sisterhood of world wide Girl Scouting,

and motivate younger scouts to stay active in Girl Scouting.

WHEREAS; Sheila has demonstrated her serious commitment to

herself, her community, her world, and the future by her

active participation in scouting, as well as her academic

excellence at Novi High School and The American School in

London, and her volunteer commitments to her church, and

school related activities, in Novi and currently London

England, and

WHEREAS; North Atlantic Girl Scouts honored Sheila on May

10, 1995, as she earned her Girl Scout Gold Award.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Novi City Council

commends Scout Sheila Ann O'Sullivan for her commitment,

achievement and leadership as an example to out youth and

as an outstanding citizen of Novi and London, England.

Mayor McLallen made the presentation to Sheila O'Sullivan.

PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed Vacation of Blue Ox Street

Mayor McLallen said this was a Public Hearing for the proposed vacation of Blue Ox Street. She said it was in the area of the South/east corner of Novi Road and Grand River. The purpose of the vacation was to permit the project known as Main Street to move forward.

Mr. Watson said the procedure for vacating a public street was to introduce the resolution, conduct a public hearing and take action on it. He said there was a resolution in the Council packets that was the resolution to do that. He said the particular area proposed to be vacated was that portion of Blue Ox between Paul Bunyan and the easterly lot line of Lot 29 of the old Novi Gardens Subdivision.

Mayor McLallen stated the resolution was known as Item 4E on the Agenda.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Novi has determined

that it is necessary for the health, welfare, comfort and

safety of the people of the City of Novi to vacate a portion

of Blue Ox Street, as described in the original minutes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a portion of Blue Ox

Street, as described in the original minutes be, and the

same hereby is, vacated from said plat.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Novi hereby

reserves an easement in said vacated portion of Blue Ox

Street for public utility purposes.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall record

this Resolution with the Register of Deeds for the County

of Oakland and a copy shall be sent to the State Treasurer.

This action is taken pursuant to Sections 256 and 257 of

Act 288 of the Public Acts of 1967, MCLA 560.256 and MCLA

560.257.

Mayor McLallen closed the public hearing on Blue Ox Street and advised action would be taken as Item 4E during Matters for Council Action Part I.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Mayor McLallen stated the issue of the water park had brought most of the audience to the meeting had actually engendered the most calls and comments she had personally received since she had been Mayor. She said this was what Novi was all about; it was a heavily citizen participant City. She said this would be a neutral forum to hear the citizens comments. Mayor McLallen advised the audience of the ground rules.

Mayor McLallen said based on the comments and conversation this issue had brought up basically five issues of grave concern to the community. She said the issues were of location of proposal, access to the proposal, traffic, long term funding and aesthetics.

These items appeared to be the universal concerns in varying degrees across the board.

Mayor McLallen explained the issue came forward by citizen initiative. She said the City Council had no funding for this type of project and the only way it could become funded was if it was taken straight to the voters for a bond. In order for that to happen the issue had to come to light. She said initial investigation was done by a citizen committee and that was the proposal that was brought to Council for the first time for information July 12. She said it was on the agenda for the first time for discussion by Council tonight. She said nothing had been done and this was just step 2 in a public process.

Mayor McLallen asked that anyone that wanted to address the Council on an issue that was not the water park to speak first.

Sarah Gray, 133 Maudlin, requested that Item 12 be pulled off the Consent Agenda regarding Ivy Leaf Walkway for discussion. She asked that it be pulled for any action unless they had received a letter from Mr. Fisher acknowledging their conversation. She said the letter was sent to Mr. Kriewall, Don Saven, Chris Pargoff, and

Mike Hilley. Ms. Gray said Mr. Fisher agreed to clean it up. She said he had not done it yet. She said unless Council had something from Mr. Fisher saying that he agreed to clean it up she didn't think Council had any business vacating it.

Ms. Gray continued as Chair of the Shoreline Committee. She said she was surprised when she received a letter from Councilman Mitzel who represented himself as a private resident. She said she appreciated his comments and views. Ms. Gray said there were several things Council needed to be aware of.

Ms. Gray said two years ago when the committee got started they did a survey of the City and the overwhelming response of that survey City wide was that the residents of Novi wanted to retain ownership of the 10 or 11 acres of City property on Walled Lake at the end of Novi Road at 13 Mile where the Casino used to be and they wanted it to be developed as park land.

Ms. Gray said Council had to understand that the roadways that were in there South Lake, East Lake and Novi Road had not been vacated or abandoned. She said the Shoreline Committee was going through the process that they had for two years in trying to develop something for which they could get neither concept approval, funding for feasibility studies to answer questions raised by Council last fall. She said they did get two bids one was $5,000 and one was $25,000. Ms. Gray said how could they come to Council and ask them to spend money. She said there were issues involved with Lots 41 and 42 of which the City had ownership. She said unfortunately one of the neighbors building and fence was encroaching on City property.

Ms. Gray said word had gotten back to her through the business community that Mr. Kriewall was in negotiation with developers and restaurateurs for building what the Shoreline Committee proposed but did not get concept approval for. She said Mr. Kriewall said it was a lie and he wanted to know who her source was. She would not reveal her source but said suffice it to say that the people with whom he had been in contact with are the ones doing the talking. She felt Council needed to talk to Mr. Kriewall and ask what he was doing behind their backs.

Ms. Gray said she agreed with Council that it was prime property for a park and what better place to put a water slide on the lake. She said she had put an awful lot of time and effort into this community and the committee. She said they were trying to re-invent the wheel and were going nowhere fast. She felt that she must resign from the Committee in protest. She felt that it was another Committee that was set up to fail and by that she meant it was a "keep them busy and we'll do what we want anyhow" attitude. She recommended that Council immediately disband the Shoreline Committee because they were not doing anything. She said park land was needed and the City owned 10 acres on the lake. She said either turn that land over to Parks and Recreation and develop it or down zone it from the B-3 zoning it currently had to residential, put it on the market and sell it and get out of the real estate market once and for all.

Kevin Crain, Vice Chair of the Police and Fire Needs

Assessment Committee read a letter drafted by John Chambers

the Chairman of the Committee. "The Police and Fire Needs Assessment Committee on an interim basis wishes to appraise the Mayor and Council on its deliberations. Before we do we are pleased that the Mayor and Council approved the Truth in Taxation milage for special Police and Fire Fund. We believe that this communicates strong support for the basic safety and welfare of the community. The Committee has approached its charge assertively and openly. The members of the Committee desire to be thorough in their research, deliberations and recommendations. During our weekly meetings, including the week of July 4, we have initially reviewed the police departments written building requirements, toured the physical plant to assist the members in conceptualizing the requested renovations. Also we have toured Novi Fire Stations 1 and 3 and the renovated Farmington Hills Fire Station for comparisons. Concomitantly, we have initially reviewed the current police and fire and General Fund Milages. We have had a preliminary discussion of the financial impact of the Headley Amendment, Truth in Taxation and Proposal A. We endeavored to present to you a plan which would include the vision of the committee inclusive of renovated or new buildings, Fire Station 5, equipment and personnel to coincide with projected population growth to the City's capacity of 65,000 which is projected at the year 2010. We believe that it will not be possible to adequately complete our task within the 90 day time limit that you established when you created the Committee. It is our intention to present to you a complete and reasonable package for your consideration. We have areas in which we still need to gather preliminary information beyond the initial information forwarded to us. We envision examining various levels of automation for dispatching, automated communications with the police officers for reporting, filing and retrieving and are requesting the Chair of the Computer Committee to discuss with us the perceived needs of the Police and Fire Departments to name a few areas. We will probably review the Fire Department in three to five meetings whereas we will expend a larger commitment to the Police Department. The members of the Committee at our July 11, 1995 meeting unanimously felt that we cannot present a complete plan and recommendations by your August 21, 1995 City Council meeting the latest date which would be for inclusion of ballot language for 1995 election. We strongly believe that it is in the best interest of the Mayor and Council and the current and future citizens of Novi that we collectively present to the populace a program which is thorough and complete. Therefore, we respectfully request that the Mayor and Council extend our time frame to the end of January, 1996."

Mr. Crain said he was given this responsibility since John Chambers was in Florida. He said nearly every member of the Committee was present and would appreciate City Council looking at this, think about it tonight and give them a recommendation back.

Mayor McLallen said given this agenda it would probably be put on the August agenda for full discussion.

Councilman Toth said there was a Computer Committee tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. and he would appreciate having a representative of the Police and Fire Needs Assessment Committee present.

Mayor McLallen said the City Manager was not present tonight as his father was suffering heart problems and he took him to the hospital this afternoon. She said Craig Klaver, Assistant City Manager was present.

Sandra Bullen, 40520 Guilford, wanted to talk about the proposal for a sidewalk to be constructed in front of the Village Oaks Elementary School. She said she understood there was a proposal before Council that a sidewalk be built on the east side of Willowbrook from Village Wood to the bridge. She represented four of the eight households that would be affected and that were opposed to the sidewalk. She said the manner in which they found out about this was the surveyors in her backyard that informed her there was a sidewalk going in. She said they were very upset because they had no knowledge of this before at all.

Ms. Bullen advised Council there were four letters in their packets from the four residents that she was representing. She wanted Council to very seriously consider before the money was expended the necessity of the sidewalk. She said they felt it was not necessary considering there was a sidewalk on the west side of Willowbrook from the school to where the school property ends. She said there were two crossing guards and the children were funneled to the east and west streets which did not have sidewalks. She said they were funneled to Village Wood Street which had no sidewalks. She said in the 20 years that she had lived there she had never seen any incidents of accidents or anything happening to the children. She felt that if a sidewalk were to be constructed it not only would be very costly but there would be a liability factor and also the winter problem with the snow plows. She felt that further study had to be done before anybody considered putting a sidewalk in there. She asked Council to consider this. She said she understood that the surveyors report was not in yet and wondered if this was the time to discuss this or bring it before a future meeting.

Mayor McLallen stated under Audience Participation Council would not respond if they knew it was coming on an agenda. She said they were taking this under advisement.

Ms. Bullen requested that when the subject was going to come up that they be notified, so they could attend and voice their opposition.

Mayor McLallen said so noted and Council did have copies of the letters and she would be notified when it came up.

Richard Stopinski, President of the Southeast Shawood Homeowners Group, was present regarding the stop sign issue brought up in April. He thanked Council for having it installed and it was working. He said it was not discouraging traffic but it was breaking it up and slowing it down so people could get across to the lake. He said they hoped this trial sign would be made a permanent one with the supporting TCO as Councilman Pope asked for three months ago. He said they pray for Councilman Pope's recovery.

Mr. Stopinski said they understood with the permanent sign there would be white lines painted to show people where to stop. He said they were having difficulty figuring where to stop and hoped Council would get to that issue.

Mr. Stopinski asked that the signs they requested at South Lake and Charlotte saying "Do Not Block" be put up. He said the people can't get out of their subdivision with traffic lining up trying to get on Novi Road. He asked that the signs be installed quickly.

Mr. Stopinski said the same problem exists at Duana with traffic backing up almost 1/4 mile to the park in the morning. He asked again that signs get up quickly.

Mr. Stopinski said they had asked for the same level of police patrols that East Lake had when they had the same problem. He said they did get it for about a month and that it was not consistent. He said they asked for zero tolerance. He asked that Council continue the work they are doing and get Taft Road done.

Mayor McLallen stated this issue was Item #9 under Matters for Council Action Part I.

James Korte, Shawood Lake, had two points both were part of and came up during the Walled Lake Sector Study a now defunct group. He said regarding Consent Agenda Item Ivy Leaf Walkway, 8 years ago they started trying to get the trash out. He said between Sarah Gray and himself they made it clear to Council that there was a problem there. He said this started in November and this was still there. He asked that the man be ticketed for the garbage, trash, tires, PVC, roofing and all of the other junk that the wild life was getting into was.

Mr. Korte said the Walled Lake Sector Study went through numerous pieces and came up with a problem at South Lake near Duana, Lots 40 and 41. He said possibly three or four meetings ago he was present and mentioned that someone had put up a private fence on City property and the City Manager was ready to give it to them. He said in a memo that went to numerous people on June 5 the City Manager said they would not be giving the property away. He said the fence was still up and those people have occupancy of lake frontage public property and it was unacceptable. He said looking at all the paperwork that started in 1986-87 Mr. Kriewall's name was all over it, and Mr. Bugbee's name was all over it. He said if they look at the JCK and Associates outlines and drawings of the area the whole thing was unacceptable.

Mr. Korte said he found it interesting that there were so many people present this evening. He said it was their prime opportunity to get their hunk of Walled Lake. He said the City Manager was giving pieces of it away so please stake out your property and get your frontage.

Phil Morosco, General Manager of Twelve Oaks Mall, was present representing the Novi Chamber of Commerce.

Rosemarie Denton, 41447 Glyme Drive, was present to express her displeasure over the situation that Bob Taub would not be re-appointed to the Planning Commission. She wrote a letter to the editor and hoped that all the Council Members read it.

Ms. Denton said for the record Mr. Taub was a person of integrity, a very passionate person and possibly this was what ruffled some feathers of the City Council Members. She said when she contacted him in regards to Interlock, ala a 24 hour operation going into the backyard of Meadowbrook Lake, he listened to her concerns. She said he did the same when she contacted him about the day care that was proposed to go into her backyard. She called several Council Members and asked the Mayor specifically for an explanation because she quoted from the Novi News "he has not quite found his niche for service in that Commission, I don't think he is enhancing the process." She thought the comments were interesting and wanted other people to be aware of them. She said the gobbly-gook she received in return about him not using his talents. "Bob never used his talents to the best of his ability", she said she stopped writing with this statement because she wondered who made you judge and jury.

She said as a citizen she felt Novi needed people like Mr. Taub. She said he was a citizen, he was intelligent, he was an attorney and he could interpret ordinances very well, he was not a quasi City planner and that was the kind of person she wanted to see on the Planning Commission. She asked that Mayor McLallen reconsider and re-appoint Mr. Taub.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION REGARDING THE WATER PARK

Mayor McLallen was asked to explain the five issues that surfaced.

1) the location of the proposed facility

2) Access to non-residents

3) Traffic

4) Aesthetics

5) Concern for long range financial support

She said those appeared to be a common thread throughout the conversation. She said the other portion of the conversations were while there might be support for a swimming facility a full blown facility as the proposal stated wasn't, to the communities that were responding to the Mayor, to the callers particular likings.

Mayor McLallen, responding to a question from the audience regarding details about lanes, said they would go back and establish what exists.

Mayor McLallen stated that nothing exists and what they were present for was the second step in a dialogue. She said for years the community had had a desire or certain parties in the community had a desire to have some type of municipal swimming facility. She said it had ranged from a simple swimming pool for little kids, to something a bit more aggressive for serious swimmers to a full blown "Nautitorium." She said it had gone the whole gamut but the idea was some sort of municipally owned water facility.

Mayor McLallen said what happened then was some citizens got together and did some research on costs, etc. so there would be a starting point for the conversation. She said to keep in mind that there was no money in existence for this type of facility. She said the only way money was created was by everyone agreeing to tax themselves for this type of facility. She said the way that happened was that a consensus was come to, all of the divergent opinions were talked out, and then something was agreed upon. She said then that something was put on a ballot with a price tag attached and at that point all of the voters in the community could say yes or no.

Mayor McLallen said where it was now was a proposal. She said some of the perimeters were to keep the cost down, put it on City owned land and where the land was that was most accessible to children so Mom did not have to drive them and so people could walk. She said this would obviously be here at the Civic Center. She said the City did own other land that could be a possibility. She said this was just the first thoughts out of the box. She said what was bringing everyone here tonight was to say Council might be on the right track or maybe Council was not on the right track. She said there was no location or structure and what there was was a proposal and if Council chose to say there was a reasonable proposal out there they could then ask for it to be defined further and put it on the ballot in November. She said the language had to be approved by late August of this year in order to appear on the November ballot. She said nothing would happen without the consensus of the citizens and everyone was here tonight to gain consensus or just listen.

Frank Sclarous, 45204 Mayo Dr., said in the 18 1/2 years that he lived in Novi he had seen it explode at the seams. He said one only had to watch the Council Meetings and read the paper to see there was subdivision, upon subdivision, upon subdivision. He said the proposed location had not been determined but he was hoping that it would not be put adjacent to the Civic Center. He said he travelled Taft every day to go to work and he had seen the traffic build up to the point that it was unreal. He said when talking to people from outlying areas of South Lyon, Brighton, Milford and Wixom they are all very fortunate that they don't live in Novi. They say they couldn't stand the traffic. He said Novi was the feeder supply of Ten Mile to South Lyon and now it was more difficult to get out of his subdivision off Nine Mile since they paved Nine Mile from Taft to Beck.

Mr. Sclarous said the point was the traffic control. He used to come home down Ten Mile but now from 3pm to 6pm it was bumper to bumper. He said it would get to the point it would take 15 minutes to get through a traffic light. He said the first time was when Providence Hospital wanted to go to Ten Mile and Taft, then it was the Fuerst Petting Farm, then it was the Golf Dome, then it was Senior Housing and now it was the Water Park.

Mr. Sclarous said there must be precious metals laying in this ground someplace because everyone wants to come to this little portion of this undeveloped part of the community. He said he wonders if the City Officials aren't going to be satisfied in their lifetime until every inch of Novi was developed.

Mr. Sclarous said in the 18 years he had been here it was for everyone else. Everybody comes to the community, use the facilities and then leave. He said how about something for our citizens; how about a small park on that little piece of property with nature trails something the people that live here could enjoy. He said let's not supply a route for everybody that comes through our community. He said the developers that want to develop a water park could probably buy one at Pontiac Trail and Milford 10 cents on the dollar.

Marion Holt, 45409 Addington Lane, said when this first came out in the Novi News was when he heard about it and he had lived in the community about 13 months. He started visiting some of their neighbors and they mentioned that this had been up before but it was about a 1 Million dollar project. He said now it was a $2.9 Million dollar project so he had some big concerns.

Mr. Holt said living in Addington Park he got around and put a petition together and had a number of the citizens sign and he would leave it with Council. It said "We the undersigned live in Addington, a subdivision of homes adjacent to the proposed family aquatic facility. This multi-million dollar project has been proposed by the Novi Parks and Recreation without notification or consideration of the surrounding homeowners. We are vehemently opposed to the development of this facility in its present form. We request the matter tabled until adjacent property owners had been consulted and their concurrence achieved." Mr. Holt said they were not for this large aquatic facility that would be a permanent carnival.

Elaine Yocum, 44724 Yorkshire Drive, President of the Spartan Aquatic Club. She said the Spartan Aquatic Club was a United States Swimming Sanction Competitive Swim Team. She said their team was one of the largest and most respected teams in the State of Michigan. She said they had 150 members age 6 through college level with about half of the membership from Novi. Ms. Yocum said their membership had novice swimmers through State, National and Olympic Trial qualifiers.

Ms. Yocum said when the pool project first began they were excited to hear that Novi was going to build a pool. They felt that a pool project would attract community support both in use and financial resources and be able to operate on a break even level.

Ms. Yocum said what was now on the table was a summer swim club and water park. She said it was a three month facility that did not address the fact that they had one indoor pool that couldn't meet the current program needs much less future needs. She was surprised to hear Mr. Davis indicate at the last City Council meeting that the proposed facility had the support of the competitive swim community and would be used for meets. She said the proposed facility would not produce revenue from competitive swim communities as it would not meet the needs of their teams. She was also surprised to hear Mr. Davis indicate that simply a pool in a park would fail and it was necessary to have other amenities. She said it was her understanding that the Northville Swim Club which had many Novi members currently had a waiting list of about 400 families. She said it was simply a swimming pool.

Ms. Yocum asked that Novi revisit the original concept of a 50 meter indoor pool and they would bring the full support of the competitive swim community to such a project. Further, they believe such a project would meet every recreational, therapeutic and competitive need of the community. She said it would serve our current and expanding needs and could be self supporting. She said they could not support the current plan.

Jan Forester, Dunbarton Pines Board Member, said there had been very good cases presented and they had touched basically on the same things that their immediate concerns were. She said being a Real Estate Agent her first concern was property values and what would happen to them if a park of this magnitude was plunked down right into the center of a residential area. She said there seemed to be a common thought with a lot of the people and the aesthetics as they were now they thought the property values would not withhold. She asked if other locations were considered. She said she understood there were 400 acres somewhere in Novi that would be available. She said she heard about the Walled Lake property where the Walled Lake Casino used to be and the amusement park used to be. She asked why not a water amusement park.

Jan Forester asked if this would have to be rezoned and would the DNR approve the trees being torn down and the neighbors who bought their property there thinking the trees would be staying. She said a lot of questions were coming to mind and she was wondering if the committee addressed any of these like Ten Mile and Taft Traffic. It was said the location was chosen so that the children could walk to the park. She asked if other water parks were researched. She had a flier from one of the neighbors showing a water park and gave it to the Clerk.

Ms. Forester said Novi did need some facility for children, teenagers and adults to enjoy and be able to have swim clubs and teams. She said let's give the kids something to do and some place to be.

Ms. Forester said one of the people in the neighborhood said "why now had Novi decided to spend $3.5 Million on a water park." She thought that summed it up. She said for $3.5 Million Novi could have a year round pool.

Donna Bavarscus, 45391 Yorkshire, said she was a member of the Aquatic Committee and she wanted to state some things that had gone on during her two years on the Committee. She thanked Council for reviewing the plans and the Mayor for clarifying the five main concerns. She thought if many of the concerns were clarified there would be more support for moving forward with the facility.

Ms. Bavarscus said part of the problem was that it was referred to as a water park and when that's said people think of Red Oaks or Waterford Oaks. She said this was not what the Committee ever envisioned and was not what was envisioned now. She said they would like a private facility for the residents of Novi and that was what was researched. She said two years ago when petitions were submitted in support of this facility the residents voiced concern that they wanted a private outdoor facility so that it would not attract large floods of people. She felt that the news media had done their share in providing much of the misinformation.

Ms. Bavarscus said what they wanted and what they still would like was a leisure family type facility for the residents because it was their feeling, from conversations and calls, that residents did want some type of aquatic facility in Novi. She said what she had heard since this issue came to light in the paper was that there was a grave concern about the location. She thought that it needed to be pointed out that the location had not been set in stone. She said there was other park land available and that the Committee wanted to keep it in the park land area that was already purchased to keep the cost down. The issue was brought up of purchasing new land but the Committee didn't want to increase the cost so they thought using park land that was already purchased would be the most economical and easily accepted by the community members. She said that it did not have to be at the location that was recently presented.

Ms. Bavarscus said it would be a private Novi residents only facility as it was proposed now and an outdoor facility. She said mention was made that there was a perfectly good facility now and were talking about the Novi High School Pool. She said the water was always to cold to swim in, it was not an aesthetically pleasing area to go in the summer when it was 90 or 95 degrees. She said she was glad to see so many people out because if there are concerns about this proposal the Committee and Mr. Davis welcomes their input so that they can make adjustments.

Ms. Bavarscus said she spoke with someone from Addington Park tonight at the ball fields and they said they definitely wanted a pool in Novi they just didn't want it where it was proposed. She said they needed to go back to the drawing board and she would like the opportunity to do that.

She said the competitive swim club had always from the beginning wanted a facility geared specifically for a finite group of people. She said the Committee felt that they needed to meet most of the needs of the majority of the residents of Novi. She said there were a lot of competitive clubs and organizations in the community and they felt that the leisurely family facility would be the most acceptable to the majority of the people. She understood there were other groups who had concerns and have facilities of their own that they would like for their children other than a pool. Again, like the swim club, hockey members and what she asked was that they don't put a squelch on this because of their concern. She invited anyone to come to a voice their concerns so the Committee could work it out and meet the needs of the majority of the people.

Irene Fleming, 44825 Exeter Ct., said she felt strongly that a facility of this kind should not be located in an established residential area. She asked if they had considered the noise that such a thing produces. She said those living in Dunbarton Pines had experienced a fair amount of noise from the high school but that was of short duration and was tolerated because a school was a vital part of the community. She said when people swim and play around in the water they don't talk they shriek and yell. She recommended that those who were concerned with this project go to one of these facilities, park some distance away, roll the windows down and listen to the racket. She said consider that type of racket all day, every day and all summer. She said they had to consider the noise factor. She felt many people would like to see a water facility but not in the area proposed.

Ms. Kataramen, 2275 Waycroft Dr., said from what she had seen of the proposal it did state that the facility was for Novi residents and their guests. She said she could see how quickly that would multiply because our residents like to enjoy their leisure time with their friends who may or may not live in Novi. She asked how that could be controlled. She said given the climatic conditions and the fact that there was 9 months of weather where an outdoor facility would not be useful and indoor facility would be useful for both recreational swimmers as well as the competitive swimmers.

Ed Garrick, 45155 Courtview Tr., said his main concern was the traffic. He had the misfortune of having a property that backed up to Taft Road. He said he couldn't even stand to be outside because the noise was deafening. He asked that Council please consider the noise issue.

Chuck Smith, resident for seven years, said in the past Council had requested tax increases for police, fire, roads and schools. He said he understood that and he voted for those things but with the amount of money that had been discussed his suggestion was if this were to pass he would be coming back saying if you need money in the future for police, fire, roads get it out of the Novi Disney World.

Rosemarie Denton, 41447 Glyme, said the location was wrong. She said they had lived in Novi for three years and she had asked for adequate swim facilities. Her daughter swims with the Farmington Sting Rays and they are at the West Bloomfield Swim Club and she is in a developmental program there. She said she drives 20 minutes to have adequate swim facilities. She said she was very much for a public swimming pool and thought it was a good idea. She said whatever the slide stuff was, the neon lights, whistles and bells and everything else was ridiculous. She said the West Bloomfield Swim Club was an olympic size pool, they bubble it in the winter time and use half of it for competitive swimming and the other half for entertainment. She said they were on the waiting list in Northville and it was a 3 to 5 year wait. She said the pool was full and all they had was a diving board and a pool. They were on the Newburg Swim Club wait list and that was another 2 years. They have a simple slide, a kiddy pool and there's a waiting list. Finally, they are on the Farmington Glen waiting list which was another 2 to 3 year wait. She said they put money up at all three locations and they all have the basic olympic pool and the people can't get in.

She said give us a pool that they could use 3 months of the year that was reasonably priced for the members of the community, and bubble it in the winter. She said if they have to have a graduated entrance or whatever then she suggested that they look at a pool that was recently built in Las Vegas at the MGM Grand that she had the pleasure of enjoying. She said it had a graduated entrance, there was not one slide or diving board. She said the children and handicapped could enter it from the graduated entrance. She said a cross structure was appropriate for competitive swimmers to do there laps and they blocked that off. She said it was a beautiful layout and very aesthetically pleasing but something that could be enjoyed by everybody. The other pool she mentioned was in Disney Land at the Grand Floridian it didn't have a slide or diving board either and the pool was packed. She said they don't need all the fancy stuff let them go to Red Oaks, Rolling Oaks or Waterford Oaks and keep that out of Novi. She asked for a basic swim facility that the adults and children could enjoy and lets forget this Hollywood stuff it wasn't necessary.

David Landry, 45471 Kimberly Court in Addington Park, said he had been a resident of Novi for 18 days and he was just here to tell Council he didn't move here to live next to Cedar Point. He thought that everyone in the room recognized that if they built a grandiose aquatic facility it would be a risk to whatever neighborhood it was adjacent to. He asked why incur that risk as there were plenty of risks attended on a project of this nature. How would it be paid for, who would use it and how would they determine who was going to use it, what's the fee, what are the hours. He said it made no sense to incur another risk to the adjacent community. He asked that it not be built in his neighborhood or anyone elses.

Denise Neinhaus said he was Vice President of Dunbarton Pines Homeowners Association but was speaking on behalf of her own personal needs. She asked why they would want to sandwich a water park of this magnitude in a seven acre spot surrounded by residential when there were other locations. She said there was a 400 acre parcel at Novi and Twelve Mile Road that would be better suited for a water park. She said as far as children walking anywhere to any location now a days, how many kids walk anywhere. She said she didn't want Cedar Point in her backyard either.

Terry Ozog, 45168 Roundview in Dunbarton Pines, said Roundview was the street that would get a number one view of the future park. He said he had been in Novi for seven years and had seen the Expo Center, the Sports Car Center of America and had friends on the Police and Fire Departments. He asked why Novi felt that they had to do something so grandiose. He said he had four children and he would love to see something like the Northville Swim Club maybe even at the location that was proposed, but this thing is nuts and should have been shot down and not even presented. He asked that Council recognize that the people in Novi do not want to be considered a new mecca Southfield on 696. He said they moved out to Novi because it was a nice quaint community next to Northville. He said a lot of people would like a nice swim club but not this and asked Council to consider what the people wanted.

Joseph Kosnick, Dunbarton Pines, said he agreed that neighboring citizens should have been consulted before it got this far. He said one consideration would be if something was done in this area could more needs be met year round in using that property. He thought there was a lot of support for the swim club and asked if there was enough room to have a park around it and combine some of these other ideas and maximize the utility. He asked for something for seniors and families to enjoy the swimming facility but also have a picnic too. He asked if there could be an indoor facility that was not just devoted to aquatics. For example, something for the children as far as gymnastics, basketball or something else. He asked if these things could be done in a tasteful way and could we get community support for that. Mr. Kosnick asked that the facility be made affordable to all citizens and not just the affluent.

Bill Wenzel, Royal Crown Estates, said he and his wife were opposed to the project and agreed with most of the negatives and saw very little positive. He asked how they proposed to fill the pool and keep it filled. He said some residents had problems watering their lawns they also had a matter of infrastructure. He said every time it rained it travelled Taft Road and there were ruts in the road already cause hydoplaning and there was a drainage problem there. He said the increased traffic, the entire rebuilding of Taft Road, entrances, low profile of the land itself and the water that went through there made it a poor site. He said they voted for the acquisition of additional park land and there was plenty of park land that was not surrounded by or in the middle of residential areas. He asked where the land use plan for the development of recreation in Novi was. He asked for a presentation to the citizens explaining what the future plans were in the long run and not something that was conceived because it might be 95 degrees for 3 or 4 consecutive days. He asked to see something that looked further out into the future.

Mr. Wenzel said they did agree that a municipal swimming pool for children of all ages was a worth while thing. He said put it some place where the traffic could handle it and not around Beck, Taft, Novi Roads or around Twelve Oaks Mall. He asked that they find some place that was easily accessible, safe and had access to the public and emergency vehicles.

Rick Hagan, 44663 Copeland, expressed his support of Novi to build a fairly simple outdoor swimming pool for Novi residents. He said he would support that with a nominal tax increase and a yearly fee. He said now he belonged to the Castle Garden Pool Club in Livonia and paid about $200 a year for unlimited use, didn't have to pay an up-front fee and there was a nominal charge for guests. He said it was a rectangular pool with a diving board, a small slide similar to what might be in someone's backyard and a wading pool. He said there were a number of other Novi residents that belong there and a number that are on the waiting lists. He asked that they give Novi a simple pool.

John Wycos, 22598 Bertrum Drive, said he had lived in Novi for 2 1/2 years after moving from outside Chicago near Naperville. He said Naperville experienced many of the things that were happening in Novi. He said lots of growth, building, traffic and water shortages and brown outs. He asked that Council do nothing to their neighborhood that would detract from the upscale kind of town that they chose to live in.

Pat Holt, Addington Park, said one point that she discussed with Mayor McLallen on the telephone that needed to be brought to everyone's attention was that this was on the Agenda for City presentation and approval tonight. She said this was not a plan in the works; it was going for Council approval tonight. She thought that was where the anger was coming from the residents of Addington, Dunbarton and Royal Crown because it was coming for Councils vote, then a General Election vote if it was approved by Council tonight. She said the residents knew nothing about it until last week and that was not right. Mrs. Holt said this could not be restricted to Novi residents because it was against the law. She said the plan had accounted for a set amount of revenue to be produced by non-residents.

Jim Utley, 25614 Gina Court, said his daughter was a competitive swimmer with the Spartan Aquatic Club and they were members of the Northville Swim Club and had paid their dues and waited four or five years to get in. He said there was a definite shortage of swimming pools in the area and he thought anyone who had kids obviously knew that. He said Dearborn had a series of pools and Livonia had many outdoor pools and yes they were built many years ago. He felt that a 50 meter pool was too small and felt that an olympic size pool was needed. He said it would be better to build one large pool than to have to build another pool five years later. He said let's get away from this water park and build a pool. He saw no need for a water park and suggested that Council dissolve the Committee that suggested the idea in the first place and start to direct Dan Davis as to what the public needed in the community. Mr. Utley said he proposed a golf dome several years ago in the same area and that was ridiculous. He thought some investigation should be done with the Parks and Recreation Department and the committee should be dissolved.

Joe Redsback, Dunbarton Pines, said he moved to Novi as an investment and the investment was in his property and his community. He said one of the things that scared him about what he had heard about the magnitude of the proposed swim park was the possible lowering of his property value. He said it might not be a concern to anyone else in the room but he moved around the country. He said his job on occasion called for him to be relocated and one of the things he didn't want to do was to move into a community where his property would depreciate. He said he had always had the philosophy location, location, location.

Mr. Redsback said his family were members of the Northville Swim Club and he spent the time to join that club. He said it was not located in an area that had a lot of housing adjacent to it. He said there were homes in Dunbarton, Royal Crown, Addington Park and most of them start at $200,000 and go up. He said if he took a 20% hit on his property it would be a $40,000 depreciation. He said he would like to see a community pool, soccer and baseball fields and he would like to see the City of Novi do something like the City of Farmington Hills had done. He said they put a magnificent park on Eight Mile, a big complex, that took into account not only swimmers, but soccer and baseball players, parks, etc. He said Council needed to think about that and like another gentlemen said "think long term."

Jim Carson, Dunbarton Pines, said the process was supposed to come to a consensus on this proposal tonight. He didn't think Council had that and thought that there was a tremendous amount of opposition and if they were to stay true to the process that this at the very minimum needed further study if not complete rejection.

He came without a tremendous amount of knowledge in terms of the specifics of the proposal. He said nothing had been provided this evening to give him more insight as to what some of the specifics were. Mr. Carson said he had heard a lot of cons but not a lot of benefits of the proposal except that there was a segment of the community that might be interested. He asked that it be remanded for further study or wholesale rejection of the proposal.

Resident of Addington Park, said he was for a swimming pool but not an aquatic facility. He said he grew up in the Dearborn area that had five community pools most of which were surrounded by a buffer, usually a park, which allowed for dissipation of noise and the things that would detract from the surrounding homes. He said if his math was correct the amount of money being talked about spending for the aquatic park would build as many as six smaller pools. He said if five or six small pools were located throughout the community surrounded by buffer parks it would be much more amenable and would reduce the traffic significantly to those areas.

Don Ware, Addington Park, said nothing positive about this was heard tonight. He said it seemed there was consensus and it was rejection of an aquatic park of any magnitude. He said he was for competitive swimming, intermural swimming things that lead to the olympics. He felt the smaller things should be focused on but not an aquatic park. He said he was opposed to the proposed site across from Addington Park on Taft. He said the last thing he wanted to do was come out of Addington Park in the mornings and look at big blue slides especially in the winter months when the foliage was off the trees. He said the noise level would be atrocious.

Dawn Marsupi, 45262 Yorkshire Drive, said 1 1/2 or 2 years ago she heard that Novi was going to build a pool and was excited about it. She learned there was going to be a meeting from a neighbor and attended three of them. She said they discussed layout of water slides, etc. something for all ages. She said unfortunately they didn't have big participation, there wasn't a lot of say, the structure was planned trying to meet all needs. She said she would be happy with a pool without a diving board or slide that she and her children could enjoy three months of the year.

Mary Muller, Addington Park, said she noticed that many of the people present never actually had a copy of the proposal in their hands. She said for the people that don't have that information she wanted to share a few points on the proposed development. She said they were talking 2,400 sq. ft. of locker rooms, 12,000 sq. ft. zero depth pool, 3,500 sq. ft. lap and diving pool, two 25 to 30 ft. tall water slides with pools, two shaded canopies, sand play areas, volleyball courts, concession stands, 3,400 sq. ft. of concrete deck service, parking lots, etc. She said this was a major operation.

Mrs. Muller said she didn't want her tax dollars spent on a facility that could only be used three months out of the year. She thought an enclosed indoor pool with an outside park and outside pool as well would be great. She felt the cost to participate would make the facility not accessible to most of the residents because the admission fees were $4.00 per resident, $7.00 for non-residents and an average family of four was $200 for a summer long pass. She said besides that cost if this didn't fly with Novi residents and if the support wasn't there long range she wondered if this would turn into a public facility open to everybody and anybody. She didn't see how this could be prevented.

Mrs. Muller said the location was a concern because she lived nearby. She noticed in the proposal the beginning statement regarding location was "the Committee feels very strongly that the location for the aquatic center should be centrally located within the City and close to the residential population." She thought they had found out that the committee was wrong. Mrs. Muller said the land was zoned Community Parks and Residential and she didn't feel it was a community park; it sounded to her like a commercial venture. She said the City was looking to make money on it whether to just cover costs or to make profits. She said to put things into another perspective with Novi and their reputation for controlling development what if this were an independent developer trying to put this through Novi City Council, would it fly, she didn't think so.

Mayor McLallen thanked everyone for coming out this evening. She said the discussion had been helpful and the number one issue was that Council needed their input. She said unfortunately the residents came out and gave it to Council tonight and Council had been reminded that they needed to let the residents know sooner, more often and most frequently when these things are perking along. She said Council would work to rectify that problem. In summation, everyone had grave concerns with the location, over the grandiose of the project, apparent sympathy for some type of water facility but it must be planned for long range needs and long range financial stability.

Mayor McLallen said this audience participation would be closed and move down to Matters for Council Action - Part I and this would be Item #1. She said before the residents left the meeting they would know what direction the Council would take.

A resident advised the Council that another significant issue tonight was the cost and that it would only be utilized for three months out of the year.

CONSENT AGENDA

1. Approval of Minutes - Special Meeting of June 27.

2. Approval of request to place subdivision sign in boulevard

right of way - Windridge Place subject to filing of license

agreement

License - Removed by Councilwoman Mason

4. Agreement between Highland Hills Estates Association and the

City re: Payment for construction of Noise Abatement Wall

5. Resolution - Approval of MDOT Contract No. 95-0573 - Highland

Hills Noise Abatement Wall and I-96 Reconstruction work

WHEREAS, the Michigan Department of Transportation will be

reconstructing I-96 within the City of Novi generally between

Meadowbrook and Haggerty roads; and,

WHEREAS, The Highland Hills Estates Mobile Home Community has

requested a noise abatement wall via the City of Novi; and,

WHEREAS, the Michigan Department of Transportation has consented to constructing a noise abatement wall in conjunction with their I-96 work; and,

WHEREAS, total project Local Share costs are estimated at

$39,100 with the City being responsible for $29,600 and

Highland Hills Estates Associates being responsible for $9,500; and,

WHEREAS, the Michigan Department of Transportation Contract

No. 95-0573 reduces the parties' responsibilities, costs, etc.

for the Reconstruction of I-96 and noise abatement wall to

written form.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk

be authorized to sign Michigan Department of Transportation

Contract No. 95-0573 on behalf of the City of Novi.

6. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-83 - West bound

Rushwood Lane to yield at Forest Park Drive

7. Approval of Traffic Control Order 95-84 - East bound

Rushwood Lane to yield at Forest Park Drive

8. Appointment of Les Gibson as Delegate and Kathy Smith-Roy

as Alternate - MERS Annual Meeting

9. Approval of Purchase of tennis court lights in the amount of

$67,200 from R & B Electric and budget amendment 96-3 for same

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following 1995-1996

budget amendment is authorized to provide for tennis court

lighting.

INCREASE

(DECREASE)

PARKS AND RECREATION FUND

REVENUES

APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE 35,000

Administration-capital outlay 35,000

13. Authorization for City Attorney to prepare agreement with

Sandstone Limited Partnership I for possible Sandstone-Phase

II Sanitary Sewer and extension Special Assessment Districts

Councilman Toth removed Items #10 and #11.

Councilwoman Mason removed Item #3 and #12

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Consent Agenda Items #1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,

and 13 be approved.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the proposal for the Aquatic Facility as presented

be rejected, that the Committee be retained but expanded to

include members from the affected subdivisions and to give

them a formalized charge and time frame.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel said he took it the motion meant to formalize this committee because up to this point the committee had not been it was just some citizens working on their own behalf. He said Council would have to bring a Committee charge together to a future meeting to be approved. He said based on the comments tonight and the motion it could be drafted.

Councilman Toth said the general audience seemed to be in favor of having a swimming pool and quite a number of individuals had expressed the idea of perhaps an indoor pool for competitive swimming. He thought that was where it originally started out at. He stated he was surprised because he had heard a couple comments about the fact that there was a 2, 3, 4 and 5 year wait to get into some of the existing pools in surrounding communities. Councilman Toth said 300-400 families on a waiting list was an awful lot of members that could be in the Novi Pool System. He said before he would consider an aquatic facility of the type proposed he wanted to see some hard figures on it.

Councilman Toth said two of the other things that were missing in the report was the perimeter fencing and security lighting. He said there was a significant cost to both of those factors and that should be a part of any cost. He said as a Council Member he was not precluding the fact that this aquatic facility might be located somewhere else in the City. He said it could be a public/private venture but definitely not near a subdivision but perhaps somewhere in the City that they could have somebody from the private industry put this facility somewhere further west or something of that order. He said he would be willing to listen to that. He said it was a large enterprise and to put it on this side of the City was just too much. He felt there were possibilities in other areas.

Councilman Schmid said he was opposed to aquatic facility whether the private sector put it up or the City would put it up. He felt that several points were made this evening that this was not a community necessarily that wanted to bring in tourists from all over the world to enjoy this type of facility. He said it started out as a swimming pool for the people of Novi to use. He was extremely disappointed that it came to this and it seemed Council ran into this all the time where not enough information was brought forth. He said this matter was put on the agenda last time to pass but for some discussion it got put over again.

Councilman Schmid said this matter was not properly handled; there should have been public hearings and all kinds of input from the citizens. He said it came before Council and we have wasted a couple of hours that would not have had to be wasted and people came from the community that would not have had to come. He said it had been a travesty in this Council's action and frankly he blamed the Administration for the major part of it.

Councilman Schmid said this wasn't the first time Council had this type of meeting when something got thrown out without proper investigation or input. He said Council was put in a very difficult position; pass it tonight which was the ploy two weeks ago because it was a great idea. He said he was upset sitting here and thinking of all the times that Council had gone through a similar event such as this. He said it was absolutely uncalled for.

Councilman Schmid said from a personal standpoint he came prepared not to vote for the aquatic pool but to suggest that the Committee go back as Councilwoman Mason indicated and set up a committee as Councilman Mitzel indicated and do it the right way the second time around. He was not for a major aquatic facility he was for swimming pools, wading pools and something a normal City could enjoy.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

2. Resolutions - Acceptance of resignation of sitting City Clerk Geraldine Stipp and Starting date for new City Clerk

WHEREAS, City Clerk Geraldine Stipp has tendered a letter

of resignation from the position of City Clerk, and

WHEREAS, the City Council has offered the position of City

Clerk to Tonni Burns, and

WHEREAS, the appointment of Tonni Burns is effective July 31,

1995,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the resignation of

Geraldine Stipp be accepted effective July 28, 1995, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions and part of

resolutions insofar as they conflict with the provisions of this resolution be and the same hereby are rescinded.

Councilwoman Mason said this had an ending date for the present City Clerk and a starting date for the new City Clerk and she asked that those two items be put into two separate resolutions. So this would be a two part instead of a one part.

Mayor McLallen said that was correct and there were separate resolutions indicating that the City Clerk would officially retire July 28, 1995 which was the formal acceptance of her resignation. She said the formal commencement of the tenure of the new City Clerk Tonni Burns would begin effective July 31, 1995.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That the resignation of the sitting City Clerk be

accepted effective July 28, 1995.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Toth passed out a memo from himself to the Council with regards to the City Charter and at will employees. He said he had discussed it with the City Attorney and there was a letter from him also. He stated he disagreed with the City Attorney's findings and his legal interpretation.

Councilman Toth felt that the process was in direct violation of the City Charter and totally unlawful. He stated he had listed his concerns in the memo and had submitted copies to the State Attorney General and the Oakland County Prosecuting Attorney for legal advise from them with regards to this matter. He said he would not support any action with regard to this at this time.

Councilwoman Mason said bringing up what Councilman Toth had just discussed and bringing in the Attorney General can Council do anything on this based on his opinion and what are the consequences if the Attorney General found that Council was out of Charter.

Mr. Watson said he didn't think that there was any question that the action would be contrary to Charter because the Charter said the City Council had the authority to appoint the City Clerk and that the City Clerk serves at the pleasure of the City Council. He said therefore, Council was without question the body that could take action as to who was the City Clerk, when the resignation was effective and when it was not and when a new Clerk was appointed. He thought there was nothing that the Attorney General could do that would alter that action.

Mr. Watson said what Member Toth suggested was that Council had already done something tantamount to acceptance prior to the date of the 24th. He said the Attorney General had written an opinion on the very subject and it was cited in the letter that they wrote. He quoted the Attorney General's, opinion "the common law rule in Michigan is that a public officers resignation is not effective until it has been accepted by the proper authority. Acceptance of the resignation may be manifested by a formal declaration or by the appointment of a successor thereto." Mr. Watson said that was precisely what he had told Council and in any event action by the Attorney General wouldn't modify Councils action.

Mr. Watson said would not modify the decision that Council made tonight. He said Council was the arbiters of the City Clerk and that was clearly provided under the Charter.

Councilwoman Mason said the original retirement date was the 17th.

Mr. Watson said the retirement date proposed by Mrs. Stipp in her letter in February was the 17th.

Councilwoman Mason said and the actual date would be the 28th.

Mr. Watson said if the resolution was adopted it would be the 28th.

Councilwoman Mason asked if that also made it retroactive to provide salary to Mrs. Stipp during that period of time because her resignation date was the 17th.

Mr. Watson said she would be filling her position through that date and she would have salary through that date. He said Mrs. Stipp had suggested separately that she was willing to perform work over those last two weeks without compensation. He said if that was what she volunteered to do she was free to volunteer to do that. He said absent her doing that it would be through the 28th with compensation.

Councilman Toth said any offers would have to come through Council and be formally accepted by Council. He said they could not be accepted by the City Administration.

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Councilman Toth said that offer had not been accepted formally by the City Council.

Councilwoman Mason said it had not been presented.

Mayor McLallen said the motion was to accept a proposed resignation to be effective July 28 for the sitting City Clerk Gerry Stipp.

Yes (5) No (1-Toth) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the following resolution be adopted appointing

Tonni Burns as the new City Clerk effective July 31, 1995

with the salary at $45,000 per year.

DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Mason said she would vote against this because when this person applied it was a $34,000 salary and when Council asked her to take the position it all at once became a $41,000 salary and now it was at $45,000.

WHEREAS, City Clerk Geraldine Stipp has tendered a letter

of resignation from the position of City Clerk, and

WHEREAS, the City Council has offered the position of City

Clerk to Tonni Burns,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Tonni Burns be appointed

as City Clerk of the City of Novi, effective July 31, 1995, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk salary be

established at $45,000 per year, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all resolutions and part of

resolutions insofar as they conflict with the provisions of

this resolution be and the same hereby are rescinded.

Yes (4) No (2-Toth, Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Councilwoman Mason asked if it would take only a 4 to 2. She asked Mr. Watson if when spending $45,000 a year why would it take only 4 to 2 instead of 5 to 1.

Mr. Watson said because this action was not making an appropriation; this action was the hiring of an employee.

Councilwoman Mason said this was a $45,000 salary so it was hiring the employee and giving the employee a $45,000 out of the City budget.

Mr. Watson said the appropriation was not made out of the budget by this action. He said Council was hiring a person at that salary and were not appropriating the dollars by this action.

Councilwoman Mason asked when the dollars would be appropriated.

Mr. Watson said during the budget process.

Councilwoman Mason asked if this was done at the last budget process for the next year.

Mr. Watson said it was.

zoning district.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That Rezoning Request 18-538 be approved for the 39 acres at the south east corner of Twelve Mile and Meadowbrook from RA to the Master Plan of OS-1 per the petitioners request.

Councilwoman Mason said when M-5 was pushed from Twelve Mile and Haggerty up to Twelve Mile and Meadowbrook Road into the face of one of our nicest rural subdivisions at that time the members of Council that were present said "Don't think you are going to come here in front of us and change this to office just because specific people bought everything around the area this was pushed to." She said that was how the people felt too. She said there was one person that came in before the M-5 was finished asking for a rezoning and Council said no. She could not back any rezoning of this area. She said the MDOT Connector was for the people in this area for the north/south traffic and to try to make this less congested. She said it would not be less congested by zoning everything that was RA into OS-1.

Councilman Schmid said he would like to see a presentation by the Hospital this evening rather than merely going by the Planning Commissions comments and recommendations, if for no other reason than letting the citizens know what was going on in the community.

He said he would like to ask the planner and the group from the development.

Mayor McLallen said this is not regarding site plan issues; it was merely a rezoning. She said the issues had to be related to the rezoning. She invited a member of the Sinai group to approach the podium.

Philip Schaengold, President and CEO of Sinai Hospital of Detroit, said that Sinai had been a major health care provider in northwest Detroit for the last 42 years. He said they were an academic health center, a large teaching institution, which had spent the last 42 years building a community health care system that served not only Detroit but the metropolitan area as a whole. He said in recent years there had been enormous pressure to shift the provision of health care from an inpatient setting to an outpatient setting, or ambulatory care facilities. He said Sinai had been in the fore front of that change in the Detroit area. There were now 30 facilities in the Detroit Metropolitan area particularly in the northwest suburbs. Mr. Schaengold said their goal was to distribute health care throughout the community and particularly in the northwest suburbs. They chose to seek a site in the Novi area where they could build an ambulatory care facility which would serve the people of Novi. They would provide access to high technology outpatient services through the development of a low density park like campus on this site. He said it was their goal and objective to provide outpatient services to the City of Novi. This particular site was selected because they believed that the City of Novi had demonstrated a very deliberate and thoughtful process of developing its community. He said they wished to become part of that process by providing outpatient health care services to the Novi Community.

Mr. Schaengold respectfully petitioned a change in rezoning from RA to OS-1 and he would be happy to answer any questions Council might have.

Mr. Rogers, City Planning Consultant, said he had a report presented to the Planning Commission which was reviewed at the time of the public hearing dated June 5. He said the applicant had just under 40 acres at the southeast quadrant of 12 Mile Road and Meadowbrook Road. The purpose of the rezoning was to permit the property to be used for hospital and medical offices including laboratories and clinics and other personal services and related activities including off street parking lots.

Mr. Rogers said at the hearing the applicant made clear that this was not going to be an in bed hospital but it would have medical offices, research, ambulatory care and emergency services.

Mr. Rogers said the property was vacant and zoned RA, Single Family Residential. There were some scattered residences along Meadowbrook Road particularly to the west. He said a professional office was located on the east side of Meadowbrook which was a professional recruiters office converted from a home that was brought in about three years ago. At that time the Council rezoned that 1 acre parcel to an OS-1 District. He said property to the south and east which was the MDOT property between the subject site and the M-5 connector appeared to be excess condemnation in the construction of the interchange and it was zoned RA District as is property north of Twelve Mile Road. He said the subject site was at Meadowbrook and Twelve Mile more or less in the area around the executive recruiters office. It did not include the MDOT property adjacent to the M-5 Connector.

Mr. Rogers said the subject site had been since the 1988 Master Plan proposed for office use. He said the proposed use was a permitted use in the OS-1 District and a hospital use was specifically permitted if it had 20 acres and they have 40 acres. Mr. Rogers said there was a preliminary site plan but it was not before Council tonight because this was a zoning issue.

Mr. Rogers said the property had been consistently proposed as office use on the south side of Twelve Mile and that was the line of demarkation from the residential to the north. He said Twelve Mile Road was a major arterial with 180 ft. right-of-way which was at the location. Meadowbrook Road was a minor arterial of 120 ft. proposed right-of-way. Mr. Rogers said he had mentioned that this use was permitted and he would strike the words from page 1, "upon special land use review." He said it was not a special land use; it was a permitted use forthwith.

Mr. Rogers said he recommended the proposed rezoning from RA to OS-1. He said the site was big enough to have a good internal road system and limit the number of curb cuts to Twelve Mile and Meadowbrook Roads. He thought it had excellent access to the freeway system.

Councilman Schmid said Mr. Rogers mentioned that all of the land on the south side of Twelve Road had been Master Planned for office use. He asked what the property was Master Planned to the north of the site.

Mr. Rogers said it was Master Planned for Single Family Residential at a density equivalent to the RA Zoning.

Councilman Schmid asked if that was 1 acre lots or more.

Mr. Rogers said that was correct.

Councilman Schmid asked if he saw any conflict having this type of development across the street from what was Master Planned to be residential.

Mr. Rogers said no, he thought there was dividing line of 180 ft. boulevarded right-of-way that was built as a boulevarded right-of-way. He thought the opportunity to develop a medical center on a 40 acre site with proper screening and setbacks was very real and very possible. He thought the traffic generated from the development would probably use Twelve Mile for the most part to get to the M-5 interchange. Some of the traffic could go south on Meadowbrook to Grand River and other destinations.

Mr. Rogers said it was highly compatible. There was a uniform boundary line between the residential north of Twelve Mile for a large segment of the City and office use on the south side of Twelve Mile. He said it had long been his hope that this land would not be chopped up into 1 acre little office sites but would have some kind of campus planning.

Mr. Rogers said he believed they had every intention to proceed if they secured the rezoning; this was not that speculative.

Councilman Schmid asked if there were any thoughts in his mind as to what would go there.

Mr. Rogers said he had seen the site plan. He said it was a group of buildings which were a medical office, diagnostic building, emergency and one day surgical. He said there were about a half a dozen buildings in a circular road system with one curb cut to Twelve Mile and one curb cut boulevarded to Meadowbrook. He didn't know if they would phase this and it was a question Mr. Schaengold might be able to answer.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Watson to think about whether Council could limit this to the hospital; he would ask that question in a minute.

Councilman Schmid said he drove by that this evening and there was a sign on the south east corner of Twelve Mile and said 3.1 acres for sale. He asked if the proposal included that 3.1 acres which would typically be a gas station site.

Mr. Rogers said the signs are sometimes put up years in advance and never taken down. He said there were two parcel of 5 acres each adjacent to the M-5 Connector on the south side of Twelve Mile that were not part of the petition.

Councilman Schmid said he was talking about the south east corner of Meadowbrook and Twelve Mile. He said he would not be in favor of rezoning this property if that land stayed as it was. If it was part of the project he would probably be in favor of it because he thought it would be a good use. He thought the density, traffic and so forth, would be less than a major office building.

Mayor McLallen asked the petitioner to answer that question.

Mr. Schaengold said he had seen that sign also and didn't know who's sign it was. He said they had the option on that corner property.

Councilman Schmid asked if there was a possibility of limiting this to the use that was being discussed.

Mr. Watson said he didn't believe that they could and that it was discussed at the Planning Commission level and the Michigan Supreme Court had in one case allowed what's called conditional zoning. However, the manner of that conditional zoning was different than limiting the use itself to only a single use within the zoning ordinance. He said what it involved was protection of neighboring property by providing a buffer area and they said that was an appropriate condition. He thought if Council was limiting it to a single use provided within that zoning district that the City would have problems. In particular, because they were calling it to question that the district itself as to whether it was an appropriate district.

Councilman Schmid said he supported the project and thought it was less traffic than a major office complex would be and it was Master Planned since 1985 or before for office. He felt the zoning on the north side which was RA Large Lot Subdivisions could be protected with this type of development. He felt it was a major development, good development and one that the City could use.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Rogers what would happen from a tax base standpoint.

Mr. Rogers said there was a split. He said the hospital function itself as he understood was tax exempt but a medical office building for physicians and doctors, rental, money making adjunct to the hospital would be taxable entities. He said they gave an answer in the minutes and whether it was a 50/50 split of the land use he didn't know. He said it was a concern about tax exempt property but there were other trade offs having a medical facility in the City too.

Councilwoman Mason said if they put a building there for any hospital they could go up to five stories.

Mr. Rogers said they may and he thought the yard space increased if they went above 2 or 3 stories but they could have 5 stories in an OS-1 District but it required a 20 acre minimum site and they had 40 acres. He said they had not seen the site plan to know if they were going 5 stories.

Mr. Schaengold said he could not at this point say how many stories there would be and that their purpose was to maintain as much of the park like setting of the property as possible.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That Council reject all bids for the Main Street

Streetscape and rebid be approved.

DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Mason wanted to know how rebidding the streetscape for Main Street would assure that a new bid would come in any closer to an estimate. She asked how the estimate could come in so wrong and who were the bidders, how were they found and where they advertised. A memo from John Beckett was in the packet which she read but it said contractors bid a unique project and a number of specialty projects such as the entrance tower. The contractor understood the project. She didn't understand because if Beckett put some specialty items into the plan for the streetscape then how could they under estimate what it would be so poorly. It was such a bad estimate that three other companies under bid it.

John Beckett said he had discussed a little of this with Jim Wahl and Mr. Watson. He said her first question was if the project was rebid how would that make a difference. He said it might not it could go either way. He said maybe Administration felt that there weren't enough contractors, there weren't enough bidders and there were other contractors that they would have liked to see bid the project. He said rebidding did not guarantee lower bids; it's a risk that could go either way.

Mr. Beckett said he asked Mr. Watson if the City was open for any type of litigation in rebidding the project if in fact the project isn't changed. He said he would leave this to Mr. Watson to discuss with Council.

Mr. Watson said his response was no we didn't. He said what the law provided was if the bidding entity was so empowered they could reject all bids and that was always provided within the information for bidders that the City always had the authority to reject any and all bids. He said in such case the lowest bidder didn't obtain a vested property interest in the contract merely by the fact that he submitted a bid.

Councilwoman Mason said John Beckett said possibly the situation might have occurred because it was a unique project with a number of specialty items such as the entrance tower. She said maybe the contractor didn't understand the project. She was very confused about the fact because she thought when the contractors were given the information it had to be specific about what was wanted.

Mr. Beckett said what he said was the possible factors contributing to the discrepancy in the bids received and the estimate prepared were time of year bids were received, lack of interest due to full work loads, concern over uncertain timing of construction, concern over whether there was serious intention to build the project, lack of competition, etc. He didn't know what she was referring to regarding big ticket items. He said when they prepared estimates they took them very seriously; they were prepared with the best knowledge that was available at that time. He said they had taken six or seven streetscape bids in the last year for other Michigan communities. He said streetscapes tended to be somewhat similar in the type of work involved, the trades involved and the bidding processes are normally pretty similar. He said based on results from these other communities within the last year and as recently as this spring and the unit prices of those bids the estimate was prepared for the Main Street Streetscape.

Mr. Beckett said he didn't know why it was high but he did present some reasons. He thought there was a general consensus that contractors are busy and their work loads are full at this time and he suspected that had something to do with it and it might have been a combination of all of these things.

Mr. Beckett said if they did rebid they needed to consider each of these possibilities and make a determination of what could be done in terms of timing or other modifications. He said the estimates are not based on guestimates they are based on the best information available from previous experience.

Councilwoman Mason said then the best estimate from previous experience was taking a project that was similar and coming up with the figures.

Mr. Beckett said there was probably no other project that was exact or similar but there are pieces of other projects which an aggregate would give them an idea of what it would be.

Councilwoman Mason said then piece by piece kind of gave him the estimate of what he thought it would be.

Mr. Beckett said that was correct; their projection of what they felt a reasonable cost for the project would be. He said that based on the prices received and the valuation of the units of the various items of work, their conclusion was that these were inordinately high prices.

Councilwoman Mason asked who gave her the answer on this sheet of paper that was all wrong about what Mr. Beckett said.

Mr. Klaver said that was the response that was made by the Planning Department; the expression "big ticket items" simply referred to the fact that there were a number of large items included in the RFP's and therefore, the number of companies that might of bid on some of the other elements might not have felt qualified or able to handle that particular project. Therefore, there might be a smaller pool of potential bidders that would feel qualified to take on a project of this size which might be one of the other explanations of why the bids were not more competitive.

Councilwoman Mason apologized to Mr. Beckett because she thought it was a quote of his but it wasn't.

Councilwoman Mason asked if the streetscape design was a pass through expense.

Mr. Wahl said it was assessed onto the property.

Councilwoman Mason asked who was paying the money that was in the warrant tonight, $16,000 she thought.

Mr. Wahl said he didn't know what she was referring to.

Mayor McLallen asked if she was referring to the design costs and proposal costs.

Councilwoman Mason said it was in the warrant.

Mr. Kapelczak said everything that he knew today was that the developers put up the engineering money to date with the City and that was a reimbursement.

Councilwoman Mason said the warrant had a $16,000 amount being paid out for the streetscape out of the warrant this evening. She asked if the streetscape design was a pass through item and was the money already sitting there. Is the money coming out of Mr. Chen's money or was the City paying it up front and getting it back from Mr. Chen.

Mr. Kapelczak said Mr. Chen deposited money with the City of Novi and it did run through but it was his money or the developers money that was being used for engineering. He said it was used on the engineering of the street as well as the streetscape.

Councilwoman Mason said there was $25,000 sitting there at a time.

Mr. Kapelczak said he thought there was more than that. He said he thought he had deposited $150,000.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Gibson to explain to Council which fund it was coming out of and was it from the fund that was set aside to do the preliminary work on the project.

Mr. Gibson said it was pass through money. He said it was taken from the developer and sitting in a Trust and Agency account.

Councilman Mitzel said he had asked if this would in any way threaten the approval process of the rest of the streetscape SAD's. He thought Mr. Watson stated that those SAD's could still go through as long as the final cost came in at or below the amount authorized in the SAD.

Mr. Watson said the SAD's could go forward in any case, all the SAD are subject to the code provisions dealing with special assessments and there are provisions within those code provisions to allow for a rebate if the SAD comes below a certain level and if the cost come above the SAD there was a provision for a supplemental SAD to cover that. He said the short answer was doing this would not interfere with that action.

Councilman Mitzel asked if an easier route would be to eliminate the tower structure which was an extremely high priced item that probably came in about triple the estimated cost. He asked if the bid should be approved minus the tower.

Mr. Wahl said they had discussed a number of options and at this point in time they felt that it was a strong recommendation of this body and everyone that had worked on the design of the project that they were going to try to do everything they could to achieve the design as it was envisioned. He said that was one of the reasons why they wanted to take another crack at it to see if they could accomplish the project as presented and approved by Council. He said they felt there was a good opportunity to do that and wanted to do everything they could to achieve that goal.

Mr. Wahl said there were options to eliminate or modify the design but at this point in time it was their recommendation to try again and see if they could build the project as currently designed.

Councilman Mitzel said if the bids still came in above the cost he would strongly encourage eliminating the tower because that would help bring the costs down. Also, the tower at the corner was serving more as a sign structure as opposed to an integral part of the design.

Councilman Schmid said he appreciated Councilman Mitzel's statement but felt that the tower was a major part of the development. He said he would be disappointed if the architect could not bring this in as bid. He said he had all the confidence in the world it would be brought in as projected. He said it was only $265,000 and it seemed like a lot of money but last week Council spent $750,000 for a bunch of computer business.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the Exchange Agreement be approved for the

exchange of approximately 2.718 acres of City property

for 3.35 acres of right-of-way.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid said he would support the motion but wished that Mr. Wahl or Mr. Kapelczak would indicate the exchange area because this was a controversial item. He wanted the public to know what was being exchanged.

Mr. Kapelczak pointed out the exchange area on the drawing that was on display.

Councilwoman Mason asked where the entrance/exit for the 57 acres was without the City land.

Mr. Kapelczak said he would have ingress and egress on Grand River Avenue, Paul Bunyan and Blue Ox Drive.

Councilwoman Mason asked why Mr. Chen or Main Street needed City property from Grand River and Novi Road if he had his own.

Mr. Kapelczak said he was not the person to get into that discussion.

Councilwoman Mason said he was the person because he was the engineer who was working with Mr. Chen.

Councilwoman Mason said her point was the City was not making a good deal. She said a Council allowed a million dollars worth of property to be given to a developer and Council was making an exchange that meant that the City had to clean Market or Main Street and take care of it. She said that was no exchange for the citizens.

Councilman Schmid said Councilwoman Mason improperly kept saying Council gave land to a developer. He said it was an exchange of land with the developer which was very clear and it was ridiculous to keep saying the City gave property away.

Councilman Mitzel asked Mr. Kapelczak to point out what the right-of-way would be. He said it was generally 70 feet and asked if there was any place that it didn't meet 70 feet.

Mr. Kapelczak said the minimum width in any location was 70 feet.

Councilman Mitzel said then in all cases it met the Design and Construction Standards for a 70 ft. right-of-way.

Mr. Kapelczak said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason asked if the agreement stated if there were environmental problems on City land that the City would have to take care of them.

Mr. Watson said those properties agreed to indemnify the other party.

Councilwoman Mason said Council already knew the City had polluted land.

Mr. Watson said there was a ground water problem on one of the parcels.

Councilwoman Mason said there was more than a ground water problem on Novi Road.

Mr. Watson said there was a soil problem that would be paid as part of the SAD.

Councilwoman Mason said the City of Novi would have to pay that and she thought in the one contract it said it was not going to be paid in the SAD.

Mr. Watson said the soil problem would be done as a part of the SAD and the ground water that originated off site from someone elses property would not be a part of the SAD.

Councilwoman Mason asked if the underground storage tank was in that particular one or was it the leased part.

Mr. Watson said there were two different tanks. There was a tank where the soil issue is but that tank is already gone and it was the soil problem that was covered as part of the SAD. He said there was also a tank that the fire department had wanted removed in the area of the leased property. He said the removal cost would be paid by Evergreen III for that tank and if there was contamination it would be paid for by the City. At this point, there was no reason to anticipate contamination.

Councilwoman Mason asked what fund that would come out of.

Mr. Kriewall said if it was not specifically budgeted it would have to come out of contingencies.

Mr. Gibson said either that or possibly the road funds since the primary purpose of this was putting in the roads.

Councilman Mitzel said regarding the property that was labeled as City Park property his understanding was that it was being conveyed to the City so streetscape SAD improvements could be made to it. He asked if it was going to be treated as extra right-of-way and be fully maintained by the Main Street project in the agreement? Councilman Mitzel asked, where in the agreement, did it specify that the extra piece would be fully maintained and wouldn't be maintained by the Parks and Recreation Department which had no interest in it.

Mr. Watson said the improvements that would be made to that were part of the streetscape improvements. He said the provisions on Page 7 of the Exchange Agreement, paragraph 2, indicated that the owners of the properties that are subject to the covenants are responsible, and listed a series of maintenance responsibilities. He said number C was the maintenance of all streetscape improvements.

Councilman Mitzel said that speaks to the streetscape improvements but what about the remainder of that land.

Mr. Watson said it would be the City's responsibility.

Councilman Mitzel said it was a concern of the Parks and Recreation Department because they didn't want a small eighth of an acre park to maintain. He understood that they would maintain the extra streetscape amenities but it didn't sound like they would maintain the entire piece of that "City park property." He asked if it could be addressed.

Mr. Watson said if the Council desired additional maintenance of that land that could be added to the exchange agreement.

Councilman Schmid said the development would have the streetscape, all the parking lots and all the land other than the road.

Mr. Watson said that and snow removal.

Mr. Watson said there was a portion of it that was being deeded to the City for purposes of these improvements and that park is.

Councilman Mitzel said the answers that were received today stated that that eighth of an acre park would still be deeded to the City although the Parks and Recreation Department didn't want it. In order to do any streetscape improvements to it it had to be deeded to the City.

Mayor McLallen asked if language could be inserted to ensure that the developer maintained that property despite the legal ownership for streetscape purposes.

Mr. Watson said it could be done just like the rest of the streetscape improvements were done.

Councilman Mitzel asked for specific language that could be posed as an amendment.

Mr. Watson said he didn't have that but could be approved subject to the attorney's inserting that language.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the Exchange Agreement be amended to include language that the developer would perform all maintenance

concerning the piece of property labeled as City Park property.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Vote on the main motion

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

B. Approval of the Ground Lease for Municipal Parking Lot

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the Ground Lease Agreement for municipal parking be approved.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel said he had asked a question regarding Section 13, Page 5, concerning taxes as additional rent. He said there was a whole clause in this Lease Agreement that stated that the lessee would pay taxes as additional rent. He had asked for an estimate of the amount that could be expected in those taxes and the response was zero dollars.

Mr. Watson said the reason it was anticipated to be zero dollars was that it was anticipated that since the property was remaining in ownership of the City, it would remain tax exempt property. The only reason for this provision was just in case, a remote possibility, that that exemption was removed. He said if suddenly the property was not tax exempt and it was assessed property taxes, we would want Evergreen III, the lessee, to pay those taxes.

Councilman Mitzel asked how that differed from the proposed Roller Dek facility whereby they were going to pay property tax although it was City land.

Mr. Watson said the Roller Dek Facility was proposed as a commercial facility leased for the purposes of a commercial purpose. This was being leased for purposes of essentially constructing a municipal parking lot that would be open to the public and not be limited to people who utilize or develop the Chen property. He said any other property owner in the area would be able to park cars there.

Councilman Mitzel asked if he was saying that because it would be open to the general public it should still keep its status as public property; it's just that it would be maintained and constructed by Evergreen III.

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason said the agreement said the developer would pay the insurance costs on that property.

Mr. Watson said that was correct he would be required to maintain insurance.

Councilwoman Mason said if he didn't pay the insurance the City would pay the insurance and they would pay the insurance the next year with their lease amount.

Mr. Watson said if he didn't provide Council with a policy and payment for the policy there was a provision in the lease that allowed the City to give written notice to inform him that he had failed to comply with that condition. He would then be given ten days to cure after the written notice and if he didn't the City could proceed with default proceedings. He said the City didn't have to pay it and wait a year.

Mr. Watson said the critical thing in the lease important to Evergreen III or anybody that signed the lease, a provision on Page 16, "In the event of termination of lease or in the event of re-entering or reletting without termination the premises shall no longer be considered as adjunct parking for the condominium project created by lessee for purposes of compliance with the off street parking requirements of the City of Novi."

Mr. Watson said, in other words, when the Main Street properties were developed and used they would be relying on this parking space to satisfy their parking needs under the Zoning Ordinance. If they fail to comply with the terms of the lease then the City had the option of declaring those properties in violation of the Zoning Ordinance in not having sufficient parking. He said it was a very serious threat to them and was a big hammer for the City.

Councilwoman Mason said the City was renting a large portion of City property to a developer for a $1.00 a year for 20 years. She asked if a condo owner, an owner of one of the condo commercial, did not pay monthly association fees and received a lien on their building how would this preclude the lien from becoming an attachment on their portion of the common element. She said the parking lot would be a common element.

Mr. Watson said for purposes of their condominium development this would not be a common area. This would be an area that was leased and utilized to satisfied their parking purposes but would not be part of their development. Therefore, it would not be subject to any liens on those units.

Councilwoman Mason asked if it would be part of their requirements per square footage for their building rather than come up with parking on their own.

Mr. Watson said they would do both in reality because there would be a lot of parking needed. There was a provision in the Zoning Ordinance that allowed, in particular with the Town Center District, credit for parking needs for municipal lots or public parking. That was how they would take the credit but not by making it a part of their development.

Mayor McLallen stated there was a motion on the floor to approve the Ground Lease Agreement with the inclusion of language by the City Attorney covering the maintenance of the parking lot.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Roadway

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That Resolutions 1, 2 and 3 and Contract SAD #145C

Main Street Roadway be approved.

WHEREAS, owners of the property described in Exhibit A

attached hereto and made a part hereof, have requested the

City to make the public improvement consisting of the con-

struction of a street, storm drainage system and appurtenant

traffic control devices as described in Exhibit B;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The City Council hereby determines to make the public

improvement described above and to defray the cost by

special assessment upon the property specially benefitted

in proportion to the benefits to be derived.

2. The total cost of the improvement is estimated to be $1,900,000.00; $1,900,000.00 of which shall be spread

over the special assessment district as hereinafter

described, and $0.00 of which shall be paid by the

City-at-large.

3. Said special assessment district shall be designated

Special Assessment District No. 145C, and shall consist

of all of the lots and parcels of land, as hereinafter

described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part

hereof.

4. Said special assessment shall be made in the aforesaid

district on the basis of benefits to be received.

5. The City Manager is directed to cause to be prepared the

necessary final profiles, plans, specifications,

specifications, assessment district and detailed estimates of cost and report the same to the Council.

6. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they

conflict with the provisions of this resolution be, and

the same hereby are, rescinded.

RESOLUTION NO. 2

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the final profiles,

plans, specifications and assessment district for the proposed

public improvement, consisting of the construction of a street, storm drainage system and appurtenant traffic control

devises as described in Exhibit B; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has met and heard all interested

persons to be affected by the proposed public improvement,

consisting of the owners of the property described in Exhibit

A attached hereto and made a part hereof;

AND, WHEREAS, the City Council deems it advisable and necessary to proceed with said public improvement;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The City Council hereby determines the public improvements described above are necessary and approves

the profiles, plans, specifications and assessment

district for the aforesaid public improvement, determines

the estimated cost of said improvement to be $1,900,000.00, and estimates the useful life thereof to

be not less than twenty (20) years.

2. The City Council determines that of said total estimated

cost, the sum of $1,900,000.00 shall be paid by special

assessment upon the property specifically benefited, as

more particularly hereinafter described.

3. The City Council hereby designates the lots and parcels

of land as the property to comprise the special assess-

ment district upon which the special assessments shall be

levied as the same is described in Exhibit A attached

hereto and made a part hereof.

4. The City Assessor be and is hereby directed to prepare a

special assessment roll including all lots and parcels of

land within the special assessment district herein designated, and the Assessor shall assess to each such lot or parcel of land the proportionate amount benefitted

thereby on the basis of benefits received and the amount

spread in each case shall be based upon the detailed

estimates of the City Manager as approved by the City

Council.

5. When the Assessor shall have completed the assessment

roll, he shall file the same with the City Clerk for

presentation to the City Council.

6. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as

they conflict with the provisions of this resolution

be, and the same hereby are rescinded.

RESOLUTION NO. 3

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the special

assessment roll prepared for the purpose of defraying the

special assessment district's share of the public improve-

ment, consisting of the construction of a street, storm

drainage system and appurtenant traffic control devices as

described in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part

hereof;

WHEREAS, after hearing the property owners interested therein,

the owners of the parcels described in the attached Exhibit A, and after carefully reviewing said special assessment roll, the Council deems said special assessment roll to be fair, just and equitable and that each of the assessments contained

thereon results in the special assessment being in accordance

with the benefits to be derived by the parcel of land assessed;

WHEREAS, the property owners, have acknowledged that said

special assessment roll is fair, just and equitable, and in

accordance with benefits to be derived by the parcels of land

assessed; and

WHEREAS, the property owners, have requested the City to enter

into a contract with them for construction of the improvement,

pursuant to Section 30-30 of the Novi Code of Ordinances.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. Said special assessment roll as prepared by the City

Assessor in the amount of One million Nine Hundred

Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,900,000.00) is confirmed

and shall be known as Special Assessment Roll No. 145C.

2. Said special assessment roll shall be divided into

fifteen (15) equal annual installments, the first of which shall be due and payable on July 1, 1996, and the subsequent installments shall be due on July 1st of each and every year thereafter.

3. Interest shall be charged on the unpaid balance of said

special assessment roll at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, commencing on July 1, 1995: Provided, however, in the event the City issues Michigan Transportation Bonds, in whole or in part, to finance the improvement, interest shall be charged on the unpaid balance of the roll at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum or one percent (1%) greater than the average rate of interest borne by such bonds, whichever is greater, also commencing on July 1, 1995.

4. The Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to enter into

a contract with the property owners of the benefitted

property, for the construction of the improvement, a copy of the agreement is attached hereto and made a part hereof.

5. That City Clerk be and is hereby directed to attach her

warrant to a certified copy of this resolution within ten (10) days of the signing of the agreement between the City and the owners of the property benefitted, commanding the Assessor to spread and the Treasurer to collect the sums and amounts as directed by the Council.

6. The City Clerk be and is hereby directed to endorse the date of confirmation on the roll.

7. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they conflict with the provisions of this resolution be and the same hereby rescinded.

DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Mason asked if an active lien would be placed on the title of Main Street until the SAD's were paid off.

Mr. Watson said yes, pursuant to both the agreement and pursuant to the Special Assessment Ordinances the assessments until they were paid were a lien on the property.

Councilman Mitzel asked if the motion included Mr. Watson's revised language concerning the percent interest that was in his memo to Mrs. Stipp dated 7/24/95. He said Mr. Watson proposed a slight modification in the language of the street SAD documents.

Mr. Watson said he didn't hear that as a part of the motion and asked that it be included.

Councilman Mitzel he had called out Section 30.17 and it said "that interest on any SAD deferred installments at a rate not to exceed 8% per anum or any greater rate as Council" then it mentioned that "anything in anticipation shall be provided by State Statue." He said reading the memo it sounded like the Michigan Transportation Bonds were not technically an anticipation, therefore, it should be 8% but yet the proposed language said 1%.

Mr. Watson said the reason the 1% was put in there was in the off chance the transportation bonds were in excess of 7%. He said Mr. Neiman requested Council to amend the ordinance in that fashion and then Council modified it to make it clear that 8% or greater was the floor. He said it was just to cover that possibility.

Councilman Mitzel said the streetscape because it's in anticipation of SAD falls back on State Statute which said 1% above the interest rate.

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel asked at what point did Council award the bid for this road construction and whether or not the SAD that was being proposed would cover the determined contractor which was South Hill which included the Alternate A which was the mast arm traffic signals. He asked if the amount of the proposed SAD fully covered the amount of the construction of the roadway as the bids came in with the full traffic signal improvements including the mast arm signals.

Mr. Kapelczak said it would.

Councilman Mitzel said that would be coming before Council after the bonds were sold for award of the bids.

Mr. Kapelczak said yes, and possession of the money was taken.

Councilman Schmid said Mr. Kapelczak had indicated that the streetscape would be bid along with the road construction. He asked what happened to that concept?

Mr. Kapelczak said that was the way he preferred it but because of the different completion times in design between the road and the streetscape it was bid as two separate projects.

Mayor McLallen restated the motion: For approval of Resolutions 1, 2 and 3 for the Contract SAD #145C pursuant and including the attorney's memo of 7/24/95.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That Resolutions 1, 2 and 3 and Contract SAD #146C

Main Street Streetscape be approved.

WHEREAS, owners of the property described in Exhibit A

attached hereto and made a part hereof, have requested the

City to make the public improvement consisting of streetscape

improvements as described in Exhibit B;

AND, WHEREAS, the City Council deems it advisable and

necessary to proceed with the public improvements as described

in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part hereof;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The City Council hereby determines to make the public

improvement described above and to defray the cost by

special assessment upon the property specially benefitted

in proportion to the benefits to be derived.

2. The total cost of the improvement is estimated to be

$1,821,429.00; $1,821,429.00 of which shall be spread

over the special assessment district as hereinafter

described, and $0.00 of which shall be paid by the

City-at-large.

3. Said special assessment district shall be designated

Special Assessment District No. 146C, and shall consist of all of the lots and parcels of land, as hereinafter

described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part

hereof.

4. Said special assessment shall be made in the aforesaid

district on the basis of benefits to be received.

5. The City Manager is directed to cause to be prepared the necessary final profiles, plans, specifications, assessment district and detailed estimates of cost and report the same to the Council.

6. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they

conflict with the provisions of this resolution be, and the same hereby are, rescinded.

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the final profiles,

plans, specifications and assessment district for the proposed public improvement, consisting of streetscape improvements as

described in Exhibit B; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has met and heard all interested

persons to be affected by the proposed public improvement,

consisting of the owners of the property described in Exhibit

A attached hereto and made a part hereof;

AND, WHEREAS, the City Council deems it advisable and

necessary to proceed with said public improvement;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The City Council hereby determines the public improvements described above are necessary and approves

the profiles, plans, specifications and assessment

district for the aforesaid public improvement, determines

the estimated cost of said improvement to be $1,821,429.00, and estimates the useful life thereof to

be not less than twenty (20) years.

2. The City Council determines that of said total estimated

cost, the sum of $1,821,429.00 shall be paid by special

assessment upon the property specifically benefitted, as

more particularly hereinafter described.

3. The City Council hereby designates the lots and parcels

of land as the property to comprise the special assessment district upon which the special assessments

shall be levied as the same is described in Exhibit A

attached hereto and made a part hereof.

4. The City Assessor be and is hereby directed to prepare

a special assessment roll including all lots and parcels

of land within the special assessment district herein

designated, and the Assessor shall assess to each such

lot or parcel of land the proportionate amount benefitted

thereby on the basis of benefits received and the amount

spread in each case shall be based upon the detailed

estimates of the City Manager as approved by the City

Council.

5. When the Assessor shall have completed the assessment

roll, he shall file the same with the City Clerk for

presentation to the City Council.

6. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they

conflict with the provisions of this resolution be, and

the same hereby are, rescinded.

RESOLUTION NO. 3

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the special assessment

roll prepared for the purpose of defraying the special assess-

ment district's share of the public improvement, consisting of

streetscape improvements as described in Exhibit B attached

hereto and made a part hereof;

WHEREAS, after hearing the property owners interested therein, the owners of the parcels described in the attached Exhibit A,

and after carefully reviewing said special assessment roll, the Council deems said special assessment roll to be fair, just and equitable and that each of the assessments contained

thereon results in the special assessment being in accordance

with the benefits to be derived by the parcel of land

assessed;

WHEREAS the property owners, have acknowledged that said special assessment roll is fair, just and equitable, and in accordance with benefits to be derived by the parcels of land assessed; and

WHEREAS, the property owners, have requested the City to enter

into a contract with them for construction of the improvement,

pursuant to Section 30-30 of the Novi Code of Ordinances.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. Said special assessment roll as prepared by the City

Assessor in the amount of One Million Eight Hundred

Twenty-One Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Nine Dollars

($1,821,429.00) is confirmed and shall be known as

Special Assessment Roll No. 146C.

2. Said special assessment roll shall be payable as

follows: (a) $121,429.00 shall be payable immediately

upon confirmation of the special assessment roll; and

(b) the remaining $1,700,000.00 shall be divided into

fifteen (15) equal annual installments, the first of which shall be due and payable on _____________, 19___,

and the subsequent installments shall be due on _____________ 1st of each and every year thereafter.

3. Interest shall be charged on the unpaid balance of said

special assessment roll at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, commencing on July 1, 1995: Provided, however, in the event bonds are issued in anticipation of

the collection of said assessments, interest shall be charged on the unpaid balance of the roll at a rate of one percent (1%) greater than the average rate of interest borne by such bonds, also commencing on July 1, 1995.

4. The Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to enter into

a contract with the property owners of the benefitted

property, for the construction of the improvement, a copy

of the agreement is attached hereto and made a part hereof.

5. That City Clerk be and is hereby directed to attach her

warrant to a certified copy of this Resolution within ten (10) days of the signing of the agreement between the City and the owners of the property benefitted, commanding the Assessor to spread and the Treasurer to collect the sums and amounts as directed by the Council.

6. The City Clerk be and is hereby directed to endorse the

date of confirmation on the roll.

7. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they

conflict with the provisions of this resolution be and the same hereby rescinded.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel wanted to clarify that the Special Assessment District included all of the Evergreen III property including Vic's and the proposed Sports Tavern and all of the Main Village.

Mr. Watson said it did not include the Singh property.

Councilman Mitzel said OK but with the other properties it was all sufficient?

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the Resolution for vacation of Blue Ox Street

be approved.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Novi has determined

that it is necessary for the health, welfare, comfort and

safety of the people of the City of Novi to vacate a portion

of Blue Ox Street, as described in the original minutes.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a portion of Blue Ox

Street, as described in the original minutes, be and the same

hereby is, vacated from said plat.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Novi hereby reserves

an easement in said vacated portion of Blue Ox Street for

public utility purposes.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall record this

Resolution with the Register of Deeds for the County of Oakland and a copy shall be sent to the State Treasurer.

This action is taken pursuant to Sections 256 and 267 of Act

288 of the Public Acts of 1967, MCLA 560.256 and MCLA 560.257.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Councilman Mitzel thanked the Administration for following up on the comments he made at the last meeting and getting the packet together.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the Bond Authorizing Resolution, $1,700,000 1995

Special Assessment Limited Tax Bonds be approved.

WHEREAS, Special Assessment roll No. 146C (the "Roll") for the

construction of streetscape improvements in said Special

Assessment District has been prepared, reviewed and confirmed by the City Council; and

WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it will be

necessary to issue special assessment bonds pledging for their

payment collections on the Roll;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The estimated period of usefulness of said improvements

is not less than twenty (20) years.

2. Special assessment bonds be issued in the amount of One

Million Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,700,000)

(the "Bonds") in anticipation of the collection of an equal amount of future due installments on the Roll, together with interest and investment income thereon.

In addition to the special assessments primarily pledged, the

City's full faith, credit and resources shall be pledged secondarily for the prompt payment of this principal of and interest on the bonds as the same become due. If the pledged special assessments are not collected in amounts sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds as the same become due, the City will promptly advance from its general funds as a first budget obligation sufficient moneys to pay said principal and interest or, if necessary, levy taxes upon all taxable property in the City therefore, subject to applicable constitutional, charter and statutory tax rate limitations.

3. The Bonds shall be designated 1995 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT

LIMITED TAX BONDS (TAXABLE) and shall consist of bonds

registered as to principal and interest of the denomina-

tion of $5,000 or multiples of $5,000 up to the amount of a single maturity, numbered consecutively in order of registration from 1 upwards, dated as of September 1, 1995, and shall be payable annually on October 1 of each of the years as follows:

$ 75,000 1996;

$135,000 1997, 1998 and 1999;

$130,000 2000;

$125,000 2001 to 2007, inclusive;

$115,000 2008;

$100,000 2009.

4. The Bonds shall bear interest at a rate or rates

determined on sale thereof, not exceeding ten percent

(10%) per annum, payable on April 1, 1996, and semiannually thereafter, by check drawn on the transfer agent mailed to the registered owner at the registered address, as shown on the registration books of the City maintained by the transfer agent. Interest shall be payable to the registered owner of record as of the fifteenth (15th) day of the month prior to the payment date for each interest payment. The date of determination of registered owner for purposed of payment of interest as provided in this paragraph may be changed by the City to conform to market practice in the future. Michigan National Bank, Detroit, Michigan is hereby appointed to act as transfer agent for this issue ("transfer agent"). The Bonds shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity as provided in Section 9 hereof. Interest on the Bonds from September 1, 1995 to April 1, 1996 shall be capitalized and paid from the proceeds of the Bonds.

5. The Bonds shall be executed in the name of the City with

the facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk

and shall have the City's seal or a facsimile printed or

affixed on them. No bond shall be valid until authenti-

cated by an authorized officer of the transfer agent. The Bonds shall be delivered to the transfer agent for

authentication and be delivered by him to the purchaser

in accordance with instructions from the Treasurer of the

City upon payment of the purchase price for the Bonds in accordance with the bid therefore when accepted.

6. Any bond may be transferred upon the books required to be

kept pursuant to this section by the person in whose name

it is registered, in person or by his duly authorized

attorney, upon surrender of the bond for cancellation,

accompanied by delivery of a duly executed written instrument of transfer in a form approved by the transfer

agent. Whenever any bond or bonds shall be surrendered for transfer, the City shall execute and the transfer agent shall authenticate and deliver a new bond or bonds, for like aggregate principal amount. The transfer agent shall require the payment by the bondholder requesting the transfer of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer.

7. Said Bonds shall be substantially the following form:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

STATE OF MICHIGAN

COUNTY OF OAKLAND

CITY OF NOVI

1995 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LIMITED TAX BOND (TAXABLE)

Rate __________ Date of Maturity: October 1, _________

Date of Original Issue: September 1, 1995

Registered Owner:

Principal Amount: --------------------------------- Dollars

The City of Novi, County of Oakland, State of Michigan (the "Issuer"), promises to pay the Principal Amount shown above to the Registered Owner on the Date of Maturity specified above, with interest thereon from the Date of Original Issue, or such later date to which interest has been paid, until paid at the Rate specified above, payable on April 1, 1996, and semiannually thereafter. Principal of this bond is payable at the principal corporate trust office of Michigan National Bank, Detroit, Michigan, or such other transfer agent as the Issuer may hereafter designate by notice mailed to the registered owner not less than 60 days prior to any interest payment date. Interest is payable to the registered owner of record as of the 15th day of the month preceding the payment date as shown on the registration books of the Issuer maintained by the transfer agent by check or draft mailed to the registered owner at the registered address. For the prompt payment of this bond, both principal and interest, the full faith, credit and resources of the Issuer are hereby irrevocably pledged.

This bond is one of a series of bonds of even date aggregating the principal sum of $1,700,000, issued in anticipation of the collection of special assessments in a certain Special Assessment District of the Issuer, for the purpose of paying the cost of public improvements in said District, all in accordance with the provisions of state law and a duly adopted resolution of the Issuer.

Bonds of this issue maturing in the years 1996 to 2000, inclusive, shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity.

Bonds or portions of bonds in multiples of $5,000 of this issue maturing in the years 2001 to 2009, inclusive shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, at the option of the Issuer, in any order of maturity and by lot within any maturity, on any interest payment date on or after October 1, 1000, at par and accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption plus a premium expressed as a percentage of par, as follows:

1/2% of the par value of each bond or portion thereof called for redemption on or after October 1, 2000, but prior to

October 1, 2005;

No premium shall be paid on bonds or portions thereof called

for redemption on or after October 1, 2005.

In case less than the full amount of an outstanding bond is called for redemption, the transfer agent, upon presentation of the bond called for redemption, shall register, authenticate and deliver to the registered owner of record a new bond in the principal amount of the portion of the original bond not called for redemption.

Notice of redemption shall be given to the registered owner of any bond or portion thereof called for redemption by mailing of such notice not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for redemption to the registered address of the registered owner of record. A bond or portion thereof so called for redemption shall not bear interest after the date fixed for redemption provided funds are on hand with the transfer agent to redeem said bond or portion thereof.

This bond is transferable only upon the books of the Issuer kept for that purpose at the office of the transfer agent by the registered owner hereof in person, or by his attorney duly authorized in writing, upon the surrender of this bond together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the transfer agent duly executed by the registered owner or his attorney duly authorized in writing, and thereupon a new registered bond or bonds in the same aggregate principal amount and of the same maturity shall be issued to the transferee in exchange therefore as provided in the resolution authorizing the bonds of this series, and upon the payment of the charges, if any, therein prescribed.

This bond is payable out of special assessments to be collected on the lands situated in a certain Special Assessment District in the Issuer. In case of insufficiency of said special assessment collections, this bond is payable as a first budget obligation out of the general funds of the Issuer, including the collection of any ad valorem taxes which the Issuer is authorized to levy, subject to applicable charter, constitutional and statutory tax rate limitations.

It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, conditions and things required by law precedent to and in the issuance of this bond and the series of bonds of which this is one have been done, exist and have happened in regular and due time and form as required by law, and that the total indebtedness of the Issuer, including this bond and the series of bonds of which this is one, does not exceed any constitutional, charter or statutory debt limitation.

This bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose until the transfer agent's Certificate of Authentication on this bond has been executed by the transfer agent.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY OF NOVI, County of Oakland, State of Michigan, by its City Council, has caused this bond to be executed with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its City Clerk and its corporate seal or a facsimile thereof to be printed hereon, all as of the Date of Original Issue.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Bond Authorizing Resolution in the amount of $3,000,000 for 1995 Michigan Transportation Bonds be approved.

WHEREAS, this City Council does hereby determine that it is

necessary to acquire and construct street improvements (the

"Improvements") in the City as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof; and

WHEREAS, the cost of the Improvements is estimated to be Three

Million Dollars ($3,000,000); and

WHEREAS, to finance the cost of the Improvements the City

Council deems it necessary to borrow the sum of Three Million

Dollars ($3,000,000) and issue bonds (the "Bonds") therefore

as authorized by the provisions of Act 175, Public Acts of Michigan, 1952, as amended ("Act 175"); and

WHEREAS, the Improvements are in accordance with the purposes enumerated in Act 51, Public Acts of Michigan, 1951, as amended ("Act 51"); and

WHEREAS, the revenues received by the City from the Michigan

Transportation Fund pursuant to Act 51 in the year preceding

this contemplated borrowing are more than sufficient to comply

with all the requirements specified in Section 4 of Act 175;

WHEREAS, on May 12, 1995 the Michigan Department of Treasury

issued its Order Providing Exception for the issuance of the

Bonds;

1. The plans and estimates of cost of the Improvements are

hereby approved and adopted.

2. The period of usefulness of the Improvements is estimated

to be not less than fifteen (15) years.

3. The City Council hereby determines to borrow the sum of

Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) and issue bonds of the

City therefore pursuant to the provisions of Act 175 (the "Bonds"), for the purpose of providing funds to pay the cost of the Improvements.

4. The Bonds shall be designated 1995 MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUND BONDS and shall consist of

bonds registered as to principal and interest of the denominations of any multiple of $5,000 not exceeding for each maturity the maximum principal amount of the Bonds of that maturity and numbered consecutively in order of

registration of transfer. The Bonds will be dated as of

September 1, 1995 and be payable on August 1st of each

year as follows:

Amount Years

$ 50,000 1996 and 1997;

75,000 1998;

100,000 1999;

150,000 2000 and 2001;

200,000 2002;

250,000 2003 to 2006, inclusive;

300,000 2007, 2008 and 2009;

325,000 2010.

The Bonds shall bear interest at a rate or rates to be determined on sale, which rate or rates however shall not exceed eight percent (8%) per annum. The Bonds will be subject to redemption and be payable in the manner set forth in paragraph 9 hereof. Interest in the amount of $57,000 will be capitalized and paid from the proceeds of the Bonds.

5. The Bonds shall be executed in the name of the City with facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk and shall bear a facsimile of the City seal. No Bond of this series shall be valid until authenticated by an authorized signature of the transfer agent designated in the notice of sale of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be delivered to Manufacturers National Bank, Detroit, Michigan which is hereby selected as the transfer agent for this issue, for authentication and be delivered by the transfer agent to the purchaser in accordance with instructions from the Finance Director of the City upon payment of the purchase price for the Bonds in accordance with the bid therefore when accepted. Executed blank bonds for registration and issuance to transferees shall simultaneously, and from time to time thereafter as necessary, be delivered to the transfer agent for safekeeping.

6. Any Bond may be transferred upon the books required to be kept pursuant to this section by the person in whose name it is registered, in person or by the registered owner's duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of the Bond for cancellation, accompanied by delivery of a duly executed written instrument of transfer in a form approved by the transfer agent. Whenever any Bond or Bonds shall be surrendered for transfer, the City shall execute and the transfer agent shall authenticate and deliver a new Bond or Bonds, in like aggregate principal amount. The transfer agent shall require the payment of the bondholder requesting the transfer of any tax or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer. The date of determination of the registered owner for purposes of payment of interest as provided in this resolution may be changed by the City to conform to market practice in the future. The principal of the Bonds shall be payable at the office of the transfer agent.

Except as otherwise provided in the Bond form and unless waived by any registered owner of Bonds to be redeemed, official notice of redemption shall be given by the transfer agent on behalf of the City. Such notice shall be dated and shall contain at a minimum the follow information: original issue date; maturity dates; interest rates; CUSIP numbers, if any; certificate numbers (and in the case of partial redemption) the called amounts of each certificate; the place where Bonds called for redemption are to be surrendered for payment; and that interest on Bonds or portions thereof called for redemption shall cease to accrue from and after the redemption date.

In addition, further notice shall be given by the transfer

agent in such manner as may be required or suggested by regulations or market practice at the applicable time, but no defect in such further notice nor any failure to give all or any portion of such further notice shall in any manner defeat the effectiveness of a call for redemption if notice thereof is given as prescribed herein.

7. To provide moneys to pay the principal of the interest on the Bonds and in accordance with the provisions of Act 175, there is hereby made an irrevocable appropriation of the amount necessary to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds from the moneys to be derived from State-collected taxes returned to the City for highway purposes, pursuant to law. The Bonds are of equal standing with other bonds issued by the City payable from said state-collected taxes, and the City may issue additional bonds payable from said state-collected taxes within the limitations prescribed by law.

The Finance Director is directed, each year that any of the principal of and interest on the Bonds remains unpaid, to set aside in a separate depositary account, to be designated 1995 MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUND BONDS DEBT RETIREMENT FUND, sufficient moneys from revenues received during such year from the Michigan Transportation Fund pursuant to law to pay the principal of the interest on the Bonds next maturing. Accrued interest, if any, and premium, if any, received on the initial sale of the Bonds shall be deposited into the 1995 Michigan Transportation Fund Bonds Debt Retirement Fund. In addition, a sum, which when taken together with said accrued interest and premium, equals the amount of $57,000 shall be deposited in the Debt Retirement Fund and used to pay a portion of the interest due February 1, 1996. the Finance Director is further directed to open a separate depository account, to be designated 1995 MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUND BONDS CONSTRUCTION FUND into which the proceeds of the Bonds, less accrued interest and premium, if any, and capitalized interest shall be deposited, which account shall be used to pay the costs of constructing the Improvements. Proceeds remaining after completion of the Improvements shall be applied as permitted by law.

8. Pursuant to Act 175, and as additional security for the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, there is hereby irrevocably pledged the limited tax full faith and credit of the City, and in the event of insufficiency of funds primarily pledged to the payment thereof, the City covenants and agrees to provide for such insufficiency from such resources as are lawfully available to it, including the levying of taxes, subject to applicable constitutional, charter and statutory limitations.

9. The Bonds shall be in substantially the following form subject to such changes as to ministerial from as may be reasonably requested by the transfer agent:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

STATE OF MICHIGAN

COUNTY OF OAKLAND

CITY OF NOVI

1995 MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUND BOND

Date of

Maturity Original

Interest Rate Date Issue

August 1, September 1,

Registered Owner:

Principal Amount: Dollars

The City of Novi, County of Oakland, State of Michigan (the "City"), for value received, hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above, or registered assigns, the Principal Amount specified above, in lawful money of the United States of America, on the Maturity Date specified above, unless prepaid prior thereto as hereinafter provided, with interest thereon from the Date of Original Issue specified above, or such later date to which interest has been paid, until paid, at the Interest Rate per annum specified above, first payable on August 1, 1995 and semiannually thereafter. Principal of this bond is payable at the principal corporate trust office of Michigan National Bank, located in Detroit, Michigan, or such other transfer agent as the City may hereafter designate by notice mailed to the registered owner hereof not less than sixty (60) days prior to any interest payment date (the "Transfer Agent"). Interest on this bond is payable to the registered owner of record as of the fifteenth (15th) day of the month preceding the payment date as shown on the registration books of the City maintained by the Transfer Agent, by check or draft mailed to the registered owner at the registered address.

This bond is one of a series of bonds of even Date of Original Issue aggregating the principal sum of $3,000,000, issued for the purpose of defraying the cost of major street improvements in the City in accordance with a resolution duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City pursuant to the provisions of Act 175, Public Acts of Michigan, 1952, as amended.

Bonds of this issue maturing in the years 1996-2000, inclusive, shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity.

Bonds of this issue maturing in the years 2001 to 2010, inclusive, are subject to optional redemption in whole or in part in such order as the City shall determine, in integral multiples of $5,000 on any interest to the redemption date plus a premium as follows:

1/2% of the principal amount of each bond or portion thereof called for redemption on or after August 1, 2000, but prior to August 1, 2005;

No premium shall be paid on bonds or portions of bonds called for redemption on or after August 1, 2005.

Notice of redemption shall be given to the registered owners of bonds or portions thereof called for redemption by mailing of such notice not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for redemption to the registered addresses of the registered owners of record. Bonds shall be called for redemption in multiples of $5,000 and bonds of denominations of more than $5,000 shall be treated as representing the number of bonds obtained by dividing the denomination of the bond by $5,000, and such bonds may be redeemed in part. Bonds or portions thereof so called for redemption shall not bear interest after the date fixed for redemption provided the City has money available for redemption.

In case less than the full amount of an outstanding bond is called for redemption, the transfer agent described in the above described resolution, upon presentation to it of the bond called for redemption, shall register, authenticate and deliver to the registered owner of record a new bond in the principal amount of the portion of the original bond not called for redemption.

This bond and the interest thereon are payable from the proceeds of State-collected taxes returned to the City for highway purposes pursuant to law, or in case of insufficiency of said funds, out of the general funds of the City, including collections of ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City which the City may be authorized to levy, subject to applicable constitutional, statutory and charter tax rate limitations, and the resolution authorizing the bonds contains an irrevocable appropriation of the amount necessary to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds of this issue from moneys derived from such State-collected taxes, and the City reserves the right to issue additional bonds payable from said State-collected taxes within the limitations prescribed by law.

This bond is not a general obligation of the State of Michigan.

This bond is transferable only upon the books of the City kept for that purpose at the office of the transfer agent by the registered owner hereof in person, or by the registered owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, upon the surrender of this bond together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the transfer agent duly executed by the registered owner or the registered owner's attorney duly authorized in writing, and thereupon a new registered bond or bonds in the same aggregate principal amount and of the same maturity shall be issued to the transferee in exchange therefor as provided in the resolution authorizing the bonds of this issue, and upon the payment of the charges, if any, therein prescribed.

It is hereby certified and recited that all acts, conditions and things required to be done, exist and happen, precedent to and in the issuance of said series of bonds of which this is one, in order to make them valid and binding obligations of the City, have been done, exist and have happened in regular and due form and time as required by law, and that the total indebtedness of the City, including the series of bonds of which this is one, does not exceed any constitutional or statutory limitation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Novi, County of Oakland, State of Michigan, by its City Council, has caused this bond to be signed in the name of the City with the facsimile signatures of its Mayor and its City Clerk and a facsimile of the City seal to be printed hereon, all as of the Date of Original Issue.

10. The City Clerk shall cause notice of sale of the Bonds to be published in the Detroit Legal News, Detroit, Michigan, fixing the date of sale for a regular or special meeting of the City Council occurring at least seven (7) full days after the date of such publication.

11. The City Clerk shall cause a complete copy of this resolution to be published in the Novi News, Novi, Michigan, or other local newspaper, once before this resolution becomes effective.

12. The City hereby covenants that, to the extent permitted by law, it shall take all actions within its control necessary to maintain the exclusion of the interest on the Bonds from adjusted gross income for general federal income tax purposes under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), including specifically all actions and abstention from actions as required by the Non-Arbitrage and Tax Compliance Certificate and related documents furnished in connection with the Bonds and designates the Bonds as "qualified Tax Exempt Obligations" for purposes of deduction of interest expense by Financial institutions.

13. (a) The City hereby agrees, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for so long as the Rule shall be in effect, to provide or cause to be provided to each nationally recognized municipal securities information repository ("NRMSIR") and to the appropriate state information depository, if any, for the State of Michigan ("SID"), in each case as designated by the SEC in accordance with the Rule, the following annual financial information and operating data commencing with the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996:

(1) Updates of the tables of financial information

and operating data included in the official statement of

the City relating to the Bonds (the "Official Statement")

under the headings as specified as covered by this under-

taking in the Official Statement.

(2) Audited financial statements pertaining to the

City prepared by an individual or firm of independent certified public accountants ("Audited Financial Statements")

prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; provided, however, that the City reserves the

right to modify from time to time the accounting principles

utilized in the Audited Financial Statements and any such

modification, together with a description or explanation of

the impact thereof, shall be specifically noted in the

information supplied pursuant to this subsection.

Such annual financial information and operating data described above are expected to be provided directly by the City.

(b) Such annual information and operating data described in

(a) (1) above will be available on or before the 180th day after the end of the fiscal year of the City.

(c) The Audited Financial Statements described in (a) (2) above will be available on or before the 180th day after the end of the fiscal year of the City.

(d) The City agrees to provide or cause to be provided in a timely manner to (i) each NRMSIR or to the Municipal Securities Rule Making Board ("MSRB") and (ii) the SID, if any, notice of the occurrence of any of the following events listed in (b) (5) (i) (C) of the Rule with respect to the Bonds, if applicable, if such event is deemed by the City to be material under the federal securities laws:

(1) principal and interest payment delinquencies;

(2) non-payment related defaults;

(3) unscheduled draws on debt service reserves

reflecting financial difficulties;

(4) unscheduled draws on credit enhancements

reflecting financial difficulties;

(5) substitution of credit or liquidity providers,

or their failure to perform;

(6) adverse tax opinions or events affecting the

tax-exempt status of the Bonds;

(7) modifications to rights of holders of the Bonds;

(8) bond calls;

(9) defeasances;

(10) release, substitution, or sale of property

securing repayment of the Bonds; and

(11) rating changes;

(e) The City agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to (i) each NRMSIR or to the MSRB and (ii) the SID, notice of a failure by the City to provide the annual financial information with respect to the City described in subsection (a) above on or prior to the dates set forth in subsection (b) or subsection (c), as the case may be, above.

(f) The City reserves the right to modify from time to time the specific types of information provided or the format of the presentation of such information to the extent necessary or appropriate in the judgment of the City; provided that the City agrees that any such modification will be done in a manner consistent with the Rule. The City reserves the right to terminate its obligation to provide annual financial information and notices of material events, as set forth above, if and when the City no longer remains an obligated person with respect to the bonds within the meaning of the Rule or in the event that the Rule shall be repealed, rescinded or invalidated.

(g) The City agrees that its undertaking pursuant to the Rule set forth in this Section is intended to be for the benefit of the holders of the Bonds and shall be enforceable by the holders of the Bonds; provided that, the right to enforce the provisions of this undertaking shall be limited to a right to obtain specific enforcement of the City's obligations hereunder and any failure by the City to comply with the provisions of this undertaking shall not constitute a default or an event of default with respect to the Bonds or under this Resolution.

14. All resolutions and parts of resolutions insofar as they conflict with the provisions of this resolution be and the same hereby are rescinded.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel said $1.9 Million was to be used for the Main Street SAD and the other $1.1 Million would be used for Road Bond Projects.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct.

Councilman Mitzel said the $1.1 Million for the Road Bond Projects would replace road bond money which was deferred to Nine Mile paving.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct; about two years ago the City got into a situation where Nine Mile was being done and the bond attorney and financial advisor was called to set up the work. He said they were going to go ahead with the Motor Vehicle Highway Bonds for that project. At the same time they looked at the status of the existing road bond program and decided the money wasn't being spent rapidly enough. He said they were concerned about arbitrage and decided to wait and issue the bonds at this time.

Councilman Mitzel said the extra $1.1 Million would be paid back through the road bond proceeds.

Mr. Gibson said that was correct and would basically cover the Wixom Road project.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

WHEREAS, by resolution adopted on date even herewith, the City Council authorized the issuance and sale of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) 1995 MICHIGAN TRANSPORTATION FUND BONDS of the City and it is necessary to provide a form of notice of sale of said bonds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The notice of sale of the bonds shall be in substantially

the following form:

OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE

$3,000,000

City of Novi

County of Oakland, State of Michigan

1995 Michigan Transportation Fund Bonds

SEALED BIDS for the purchase of the above bonds will be received by the undersigned at the City Clerk's Office in the City Hall located

at 45175 West Ten Mile Road, Novi, Michigan 48375-3024, on Wednesday, the 23rd day of August, 1995, until 4:00 o'clock p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, at which time and place said bids will be publicly opened and read. Bids will also be received simultaneously and publicly opened and read at the offices of Bendzinski & Co., Municipal Finance Advisors, One Kennedy Square, Suite 2130, Detroit, Michigan 48226-3322. The bids will be awarded to the successful bidder by the City Council at a meeting on that date.

BOND DETAILS: Said bonds will be fully-registered bonds of the denomination of $5,000 each, or multiples thereof, dated September 1, 1995, numbered in order of registration of transfer and will bear interest from their date payable on February 1, 1996, and semiannually thereafter.

Said bonds will mature on the 1st day of August of each year in the amounts, as follows:

Amount Years

$ 50,000 1996 and 1997;

75,000 1998;

100,000 1999;

150,000 2000 and 2001;

200,000 2002;

250,000 2003 to 2006, inclusive;

300,000 2007, 2008 and 2009

325,000 2010.

INTEREST RATE AND BIDDING DETAILS: The bonds shall bear interest at a rate or rates not exceeding 8% per annum, to be fixed by the bids therefore, expressed in multiples of 1/8 or 1/20 of 1%, or both. The interest on any one bond shall be at one rate only. All bonds maturing in any one year must carry the same interest rate. The difference between the highest and lowest interest rate on the bonds shall not exceed 2% per annum. No proposal for the purchase of less than all of the bonds or a price less than 98-1/2% of their par value will be considered.

PRIOR REDEMPTION: Bonds of this issue maturing in the years 1996 to 2000, inclusive, shall not be subject to redemption prior to maturity. Bonds or portions of bonds in multiples of $5,000 of this issue maturing in the years 2001 to 2010, inclusive, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, at the option of the Issuer, in such order as the Issuer may determine and by lot within any maturity, on any interest payment date on or after August 1, 2000, at par and accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption, plus a premium expressed as a percentage of par, as follows:

1/2 of 1% of the par value of each bond or portion thereof

called for redemption on or after August 1, 2000, but prior to

August 1, 2005.

No premium shall be paid on bonds or portions thereof called

for redemption on or after August 1, 2005.

Notice of redemption shall be given to the registered owners of bonds or portions thereof called for redemption by mailing of such notice not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for redemption to the registered addresses of the registered owners of record. Bonds shall be called for redemption in multiples of $5,000 and bonds of denominations of more than $5,000 shall be treated as representing the number of bonds obtained by dividing the denomination of the bond by $5,000, and such bonds may be redeemed in part. Bonds so called for redemption shall not bear interest after the date fixed for redemption provided funds are on hand with the transfer agent to redeem said bonds.

In case less than the full amount of an outstanding bond is called for redemption, the transfer agent, upon presentation to it of the bond called for redemption, shall register, authenticate and deliver to the registered owner of record a new bond in the principal amount of the portion of the original bond not called for redemption.

TRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRATION: Principal and interest shall be payable at the principal corporate trust office of Michigan Nation Bank, Detroit, Michigan, or such other transfer agent as the City of Novi, Michigan (the "City" or the "Issuer") may hereafter designate by notice mailed to the registered owner not less than 60 days prior to interest payment date. Interest shall be paid by check mailed to the owner of record as shown by the registration books of the City as of fifteen (15) days prior to any interest payment date. The bonds will be transferable only upon the registration books of the City kept by the transfer agent.

PURPOSE AND SECURITY: The bonds are to be issued pursuant to the provisions of Act 175, Public Acts of Michigan, 1952, as amended, for the purpose of defraying the cost of constructing major street improvements in the City, and are issued in anticipation of Michigan Transportation Fund (the "Fund") payments from the State of Michigan to be received by the City. the bonds, however, are not general obligations of the State of Michigan. The bonds will pledge the limited tax full faith and credit of the City as additional security for payments of the principal and interest thereon. If the payments from the Fund are insufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds, then the City is obligated to make such payments as a first budget obligation from its general funds, including any collections of ad valorem taxes it may be authorized to levy, but the ability of the City to levy such taxes is subject to constitutional, statutory and charter limitations. The Bonds are of equal standing and priority of lien as to the Fund payments with certain outstanding bonds of the City. The City has the right to issue additional bonds payable from fund payments within the limitations prescribed by law. The rights or remedies of bondholders may be affected by bankruptcy laws or other creditors' rights legislation now existing or hereafter enacted.

GOOD FAITH: A certified or cashier's check drawn upon an incorporated bank or trust company or a Financial Surety Bond, in the amount of $30,000, and payable to the order of the Treasurer of the Issuer is required for each bid as a guarantee of good faith on the part of the bidder, to be forfeited as liquidated damages if such bid be accepted and the bidder fails to take up and pay for bonds. If a check is used, it must accompany each bid. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Michigan and such bond must be submitted to the Issuer or its financial advisor at least one hour prior to the opening of the bids. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each bidder whose good faith deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the bonds are awarded to a bidder utilizing a Financial Surety Bond, then the purchaser (the "Purchaser") is required to submit its good faith deposit to the Issuer or its financial advisor in the form of a cashier's check (or wire transfer such amount as instructed by the Issuer or its financial advisor) not later than Noon, Eastern Standard Time, on the next business day following the award. If such good faith deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the Issuer to satisfy the good faith deposit requirement. The good faith deposit will be applied to the purchase price of the bonds. In the event the Purchaser fails to honor its accepted bid, the good faith deposit will be retained by the Issuer. No interest shall be allowed on the good faith check and checks of the unsuccessful bidders will be returned to each bidder's representative or by overnight carrier service. The good faith check of the successful bidder will be cashed and payment of the balance of the purchase price of the bonds shall be made at the closing.

AWARD OF BONDS: The bonds will be awarded to the bidder whose bid produces the lowest interest cost computed by determining, at the rate or rates specified in the bid, the total dollar value of all interest on the bonds from September 1, 1995 to their maturity and deducting therefrom any premium and adding thereto any discount.

LEGAL OPINION: Bids shall be conditioned upon the approving opinion of Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C., attorneys of Detroit, Michigan, a copy of which opinion will be printed on the reverse side of each bond, and the original of which will be furnished without expense to the purchaser of the bonds at the delivery thereof. The fees of Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. for services rendered in connection with such approving opinion are expected to be paid from bond proceeds. Except to the extent necessary to issue their opinion as to the validity of the above bonds, Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. have not been requested to examine or review and have not examined or reviewed any financial documents, statements or materials that have been or may be furnished in connection with the authorization, issuance or marketing of the bonds, and accordingly will not express any opinion with respect to the accuracy or completeness of any such financial documents, statements or materials.

DELIVERY OF BONDS: The City will furnish bonds ready for execution at its expense. Bonds will be delivered without expense to the purchaser at such place as may be agreed upon. The usual closing documents, including a certificate that no litigation is pending affecting the issuance of the bonds, will be delivered at the time of the delivery of the bonds. If the bonds are not tendered for delivery by twelve o'clock noon, Eastern Daylight Time, on the 45th day following the date of sale, or the first business day thereafter if said 45th day is not a business day, the successful bidder may on that day, or any time thereafter until delivery of the bonds, withdraw his proposal by serving notice of cancellation, in writing, on the undersigned in which event the City shall promptly return the good faith deposit. Accrued interest to the date of delivery of the bonds shall be paid by the purchaser at the time of delivery. Payment for the bonds must be made in immediately available funds. Unless the purchaser furnishes the transfer agent with a list giving the denominations and names in which it wishes to have the certificates issued at least 5 business days prior to delivery of the bonds, the bonds will be delivered in the form of a single certificate for each maturity registered in the name of the purchaser.

MICHIGAN PROPERTY TAX REFORM: On March 15, 1994 the electors of the State of Michigan voted to amend the State Constitution to increase the state sales tax from 4% to 6% and to place a yearly cap on property value assessment increases. A new state education authority will levy a property tax to finance education, and a higher real estate transfer tax will be imposed on the sale of real property. Two separate bills have been introduced in the Michigan House of Representatives which, if enacted, could depending on the version enacted, result in either immediate or phased-in exemption of all or some of the personal property located in the jurisdictional boundaries of the City, without making provisions for replacement of lost revenues to the City. while the ultimate nature, extent and impact of the constitutional amendment, the accompanying legislation and of other tax and revenue measures which are still to be adopted cannot currently be predicted, purchasers of the bonds offered herein should be alert to the potential effect of such measures upon the bonds, the security therefore, and the operations of the City.

OFFICIAL STATEMENT: A copy of the Official Statement may be obtained by contacting Bendzinski & Co., Municipal Finance Advisors, at the address listed below or telephone (313) 961-8222. The Official Statement is in a form deemed final as of the date by the Issuer for purposes of SEC Rule 15c2012 (b) 1, but is subject to revision, amendment and completion of a final Official Statement. the successful bidder shall supply to the Issuer within twenty-four hours after the award of the bonds, all pricing information and any underwriter identification determined by the Issuer to be necessary to complete the Official Statement.

The Issuer will furnish to the successful bidder, at no cost, 100 copies of the final Official Statement within seven business days after the award of the bonds. Additional copies will be supplied upon the bidder's agreement to pay the cost of the Issuer for those additional copies.

TAX EXEMPTION AND QUALIFICATION: In the opinion of bond counsel, the bonds will be exempt from taxation in the State of Michigan and from federal income taxes subject, in both instances, to certain exceptions described in bond counsel's opinion. THE CITY HAS DESIGNATED THE BONDS AS "QUALIFIED TAX EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS" FOR PURPOSES OF DEDUCTION OF INTEREST EXPENSE BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. The bonds will not be private activity bonds.

CUSIP NUMBERS: CUSIP identification numbers will be printed on the bonds, but neither the failure to print the numbers nor any error with respect thereto shall constitute cause for refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the bonds. All expenses in relation to the printing of CUSIP numbers on said bonds shall be paid for by the City; provided, however, that the CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of said numbers shall be the responsibility of and paid for by the purchaser.

CONTINUING DISCLOSURE: The City has agreed in the Bond-Authorizing Resolution to provide or cause to be provided, in accordance with the requirements of Rule 15c2-12 (the "Rule") promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, (i) on or prior to the 180th day after the end of the fiscal year of the City commencing with the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996, certain annual financial information and operating data, including audited financial statements for the preceding fiscal year, generally consistent with the information contained or cross-referenced in the Official Statement relating to the Bonds, (ii) timely notice of the occurrence of certain material events with respect to the Bonds, and (iii) timely notice of a failure by the City to provide the required annual financial information on or before the date specified in (i) above.

FINANCIAL CONSULTANT: Additional information may be obtained from Bendzinski & Co., Municipal Finance Advisors, One Kennedy Square, Suite 2130, Detroit, Michigan 48226-3322.

THE RIGHT IS RESERVED TO REJECT ANY OR ALL BIDS.

ENVELOPES containing the bids should be plainly marked "Proposal for Michigan Transportation Fund Bonds."

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

earlier in the agenda

Control Orders

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Traffic Control Orders 9582 and 9568 be approved.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Rosemary Denton, Glyme Dr., thought it was a sad commentary to see that it was now the Michigan Fifties Festival as opposed to the Novi Fifties Festival. In regard to the swimming pool she stated she would be very interested in serving on that Commission. She said she did not live in any of the subdivisions surrounding that proposed property but would like to be considered to be on that Committee.

Jim Utley, 25614 Gina Ct., had been reading about what had happened with Bob Taub and was very disappointed. He was disappointed in the fact that this was a fellow that had volunteered his time to serve on the Planning Commission and then to be treated the way he was was very insulting and in very poor taste. He hoped that Mr. Taub would be reconsidered because he had done an outstanding job, supported the residents in all their endeavors and was a very fine fellow.

Mr. Utley said he had bought a home in Walden Woods which had not been dedicated to the City yet as far as the street and the amenities out there. He had a problem with the way the water drained into the sewer in front of his house. It was not properly draining. He had written comments to his Association, which was the developer, stating that he would like to see this problem and a lot of other issues resolved before those properties were dedicated over to the City. He said there were cement problems and they were investigating the quality of the cement that had been used. He felt they should look at the drainage, streets, sidewalks and all the trees that had died and with proper engineering this should not have happened. He said the way the water drained down into his property they had to put in special drainage in order to save his trees and landscaping.

Mr. Utley said more should be done about the drainage patterns in new subdivisions. He said it would be an issue in the next election because he was going to make it an issue. He felt that JCK should take a look at the new subdivisions to ensure that there was proper drainage.

Andrew Mutch, 24541 Hampton Ct., had comments concerning the aquatic park issue. He was concerned with the representation on the Committee since it would now be a charge Committee officially run through the City whereas before it was informal. He said by specifically giving certain representation to the surrounding homeowners for a proposed site when it might not even end up there; he felt Council had given them veto power which might be appropriate. On the other hand, if it was scaled back there might be a lot of neighborhoods in the City who would want something like that near by and Council had effectively given them the power to site that in their neighborhood. Mr. Mutch didn't know what proposal would come out of that Committee but felt that Council might have set up a situation where they would be able to exercise power that other citizens wouldn't have.

Mr. Mutch was also concerned about the property itself. The City has owned the property since the early 70's; it was the first property that the school district and the City purchased together. It was Master Planned the Civic Center site since 1974 and part of the area was to be a municipal golf course for recreation purposes. He hoped that something would be done with the property along the lines of nature trails. Mr. Mutch hoped the Council wasn't giving the surrounding subdivisions veto power over anything there when there might be some appropriate development as far as parks and recreation facilities.

Diane McGregor, Novi resident and employee of the Police Department informed Council the Fifties Festival had always been called the Michigan Fifties Festival.

MATTERS FOR COUNCIL ACTION - PART II

Mr. Klaver stated that Council had required Administration to bring this item back with the required changes. He stated they also provided an amended list of the employees that would, by virtue of their age and service requirements, meet the necessary provisions. He said Administration recommended approval of the MERS Retirement Window.

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the MERS Retirement Window be approved for all City employees have 20 years of service or more at the City of Novi.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Mitzel asked if this shouldn't be a reconsideration of a motion that had already failed.

Mr. Watson said it was.

Councilman Mitzel said the rules require a notice for consideration be submitted in writing on Wednesday before the meeting. The members of Council who supported this process would have to make a motion to waive those rules, make a motion to reconsider and a new motion.

Mr. Watson said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason withdrew the motion.

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the rules concerning the notification in writing

the Wednesday prior to the meeting regarding a reconsideration be waived.

Yes (4) No (2-Toth, Mitzel) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

To reconsider the motion regarding the MERS Retirement

Window.

Yes (4) No (2-Toth, Mitzel) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That the Resolution for early retirement window, July 10, 1995 to January 10, 1996, for all City employees who have 20

years of service at the City of Novi.

In accordance with Act 427, P.A. of 1984, as amended,

the City of Novi adopts the window period from July 10, 1995

to January 10, 1996 for all employees with 20 years service at

the City of Novi.

The enhanced benefits during this window period will include the following: Benefit Program: from B-1 or C-2 or B-2 to

B-3.

Yes (4) No (2-Mitzel, Toth) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Councilman Toth if it required five votes.

Mr. Watson said it did not because it wasn't an appropriation of money until Council went through the budget process. This was just to approve the window itself.

11. Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 443

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That Claims and Accounts Warrant No. 443 be approved.

Yes (5) No (1-Toth) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

12. Resolution - Administrative and Non Union Salary Range

Mr. Klaver said during the budget process a number of recommended changes in the Administrative Compensation policies were suggested by City Council. One, was the creation of individual salary ranges and there was a salary range proposal before Council this evening. It was based on a range consisting of plus 5% to minus type 10% of the existing wages for the department heads and directors with a somewhat broader range of minus 15% to plus 10% for the lower positions. They believed this represented the consensus of what Council had directed them to bring back.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That the Resolution for Administrative and Non Union Salary Range be adopted.

WHEREAS, the City of Novi is desirous of adopting a new

performance based compensation system, and

WHEREAS, this compensation system will incorporate an

individual salary range for each Administrative position;

and

WHEREAS, a schedule of individual ranges will be adopted

each year

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached salary range

schedule is hereby adopted for the 1995-96 fiscal year.

Councilman Toth felt that the Administration Compensation package should be looked at in its entirety. He said all that had been done was to hike everyone by 5 or 10% and they were still back at square one. He said there had been no serious adjustments made and some of the salaries were low and some were high. Secondly, that it would be best handled by the people that paid and a Citizens Committee should look at this and establish it.

Councilman Toth said there were a few cities hand selected to meet whatever requirements there were and he felt it was wrong. He wanted to look at salaries that were comparable in industry, in the area and those should be reflected and the entire compensation package that the City offered. That was the total cost to the residents who paid the taxes in addition to the salaries and it should be reviewed and looked at as a total compensation package.

Councilwoman Mason said she would not vote for this for several reason. She felt that they just put in salaries and they are held to them. It was now a pay policy and if it was adopted Council was held to the minus 10/plus 5 regardless of the type of job that was being done. Also, on page 4 it should say "the City Manager subject only to the approval of City Council shall have the authority to establish administrative salaries." She said in the Pay Policy it had taken out "subject to the approval of City Council." She said it took away the right of the legislative body. She pointed out that under Article 3. Section 3, items A and B were taken out. She felt that all the important things had been taken out of the pay policy and it was leaving it up to Administration to decide what they should pay themselves in the Administration branch.

Yes (4) No (2-Toth, Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That the Revised Personnel Policy, for

Administrative and Non Union Personnel be approved.

DISCUSSION

Mr. Klaver pointed out that the majority of the changes dealt with the language that implemented to salary system that was just adopted. He said there were two other areas that he wanted to be sure were reflected. One, to incorporate the change Council made during the budget process regarding the final average compensation program No. 3 that was previously improved and included in this. Two, Council also created two administration positions and those were included in Appendix A Summary of the positions covered.

Councilwoman Mason said she would not vote for this because it took out the approval of the City Council to establish administrative salaries, it took out the difficulty and level of responsibility of the position, and took out salary rates of employees in similar classifications. She said basically Council was standing on their own and Administration could pay themselves whatever they wanted out of the peoples tax dollars.

Yes (4) No (2-Toth, Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

14. Appointment to the Beautification Commission

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That Pam Superfisky be appointed to the Beautification

Commission.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

Mayor McLallen stated the final two people had been interviewed. Mayor McLallen stated either gentleman would be a good addition to the commission but her personal choice was Mr. Richard Dietrich.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That the Mayor's recommendation be accepted and Mr. Richard Dietrich be appointed to the Planning Commission.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid stated he could not support the motion. He felt that Mr. Dietrich was well qualified as was the other gentleman. He believed that Mr. Taub served the City well and would have difficulty voting not to reappoint him.

Yes (3-Mitzel, No (3-Schmid, Toth, Mason) Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford,

McLallen) Motion defeated

Mayor McLallen stated she would not retract her position for appointing Mr. Taub to the Planning Commission; if Council wanted the Planning Commission to move forward with a full complement she suggested from the people who had put their names before Council.

Mayor McLallen recommended the appointment to the Planning Commission of Mr. David Breuch.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That David Breuch be appointed to the Planning Commission.

Yes (3-Mitzel, No (3-Toth, Mason, Schmid) Absent (1-Pope)

Crawford,

McLallen) Motion defeated

Mayor McLallen requested it be noted that the Council could not come to agreement on the appointment of a single citizen out of approximately a dozen who had requested the position. She said at this time the Council was choosing to leave the Planning Commission with a vacant seat.

It was noted the seat was not vacant and would be occupied by Mr. Taub until further notice.

Councilwoman Mason said they certainly did not reject the citizens that had applied. She felt the Mayor should become humble and look at the citizens and Council Members who had backed Mr. Taub. She suggested the Mayor let go of the ego thing and allow Mr. Taub to serve his community as so many citizens and members of Council had begged her to do.

Mayor McLallen stated she would not reappoint Mr. Taub to the Planning Commission and that was a closed issue.

Mayor McLallen stated an Executive Session had to be scheduled after the close of this meeting.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilman Crawford

That an Executive Session be scheduled to follow

the close of the Council meeting for purposes of litigation and a written legal opinion Council received.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

Rosemarie Denton, Glyme Dr., thought it was very interesting that the appointment to the Planning Commission, that was pertinent to the City moving forward, was one of the last items on the agenda and that the aquatic park was first. She felt the situation with Mr. Taub and filling that was much more important. It was unfortunate that it was late and people were probably sleeping and there was only a hand full of people present to witness what just took place. Ms. Denton thanked the Council Members who voted in favor of Mr. Taub, who took to heart the letters to the editor and the letters that they received. There were a number of citizens who felt that Mr. Taub had done an excellent job and they wanted to see him reappointed. She hoped that this continued and he would be able to have his seat on the Planning Commission and that would remain unchanged. She thanked the Members who voted to preserve Mr. Taub's place because he had done an outstanding job.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Councilman Toth said some weeks ago evaluation criteria was discussed. He suggested, at that time, that some action be taken right away. He said it was now almost August and asked Council to take action immediately. He said it could not wait until the next meeting.

Mayor McLallen asked what Committee he was representing.

Councilman Toth said the City Clerk's Selection Committee. He said Council had talked about evaluation and it was supposed to be established by the Council. He recommended that Council establish a sub-committee or somebody to work on this. He said the issue now was just floating and he wanted to pin it down.

Mayor McLallen asked which committee did he recommend for evaluation.

Councilman Toth said he was not. He said the City Clerk Evaluation Criteria was something that this Council discussed and was to be worked on by this Council.

Councilman Crawford said there was an evaluation period and an evaluation to be determined as part of a couple of resolutions that Council did not pass. He said the resolutions that were just past were to hire a certain individual for a certain period of time for a certain salary; nothing to do with evaluations. He said Councilman Toth was right it had been discussed in the past, it was tacked on and part of a resolution but it did not pass this Council.

Councilman Mitzel said the Manager Review Committee met on July 11, 1995 and a report would be forthcoming to the Council.

Councilman Mitzel said concerning evaluation criteria, the Council did vote in the goal sessions at the beginning of the year to set a Council directed evaluation process for the appointed officials which was the Manager, Clerk, Assessor and the attorney if he were ever not to be a consultant. He felt the manager review format could easily be used for the Clerk and the Assessor.

Mayor McLallen said if Councilman Mitzel was offering to electronically rearrange some of the words to meet the other two job descriptions that would be acceptable.

Councilman Mitzel said he would be more than happy to do that if Council still wished to follow the directive that they gave themselves at the beginning of the year.

Mayor McLallen said Member Mitzel was willing to take the format that was used to evaluate the City Manager on ten specific criteria and adapt that to the other two appointed positions that were overseen directly by Council. Then bring the formats back to Council for their comment and perhaps implement the review process based on an agreement on that format.

Councilman Toth said when the Council met they decided on a six month evaluation period with specific criteria to be decided upon by Council Members. He said that issue was decided and accepted by the Council and the only thing not done was decide how it would be implemented and what would be done.

Councilman Toth suggested the minutes of those meetings be reviewed to find out exactly what was decided upon. He said Councilman Mitzel's offer was fine and asked when it would be brought back to Council.

Councilman Mitzel said he would try to have it ready for the next Council meeting and if not as soon as possible.

Mayor McLallen said pursuant to that Council would review the minutes to establish what the actual direction of the Council was on that issue.

Councilman Crawford drew Council's attention to the Michigan Municipal League Alert in their packets about House Bill 1555. He said it concerned cities rights to basically control their right-of-ways when it came to telephone and most recently cable and telecommunications. He said he had written several letters to local and federal people as have all the commissioners, Mayor and City Manager. He said they would be deciding on this Bill very shortly; if the Council deemed it proper to protect city rights Council would like to support the amendments offered by a couple of the representatives. He said perhaps Council could direct City Administration or the City Clerk to write a letter or resolution on Novi's behalf and fire it off immediately if Council agreed with the FAX Alert.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the following resolution of support be adopted for House Bill 1555.

WHEREAS, House of Representatives is expected to move H.B.

1555 to its final form very shortly, and

WHEREAS, the House approach to telecommunications, would

preempt municipal rights and authority more than the

originally passed Senate version, and

WHEREAS, Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak and Texas Congressman Joe Barton are co-sponsoring an amendment which will preserve the municipal rights and authority in the public rights of way, and

WHEREAS, unless modified, certain provisions of H.F. 1555

will strip local governments of several basic authorities, preempting local authority over public rights of way, preempts local zoning authority over the placement of satellite and cellular antennas, and imposes limits on the fees cable operators traditionally pay to occupy the public rights of way, and

WHEREAS, a more competitive telecommunications environment has the potential to bring down prices, improve service, and

expand access to advanced telecommunications services for the

residents of our community,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Novi strongly opposes H.R. 1555 in it present form, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council supports the

amendment sponsored by Congressmen Bart Stupak and Joe Barton,

and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any preemption that imposes new,

unfunded costs upon our citizens and businesses is strongly

opposed.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be

forwarded to Congressman Bart Stupak, Congressman Joe Barton

and Congressman Joe Knollenberg as well as the Michigan Municipal League.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

MAYOR AND COUNCIL ISSUES

Councilman Crawford was asking Council to forward to Ordinance Review some discussion by that Committee on corner clearance waiver. He said a couple of residents on the corner of Clark and Whipple said they had an obstruction on the corner and it was brought to the City as being potentially dangerous. He said the City was now in the position of enforcing the ordinance which he could understand. He said the problem was that in this particular unique situation there was no means for waivers, reliefs or appeals and he would like Ordinance Review to take a look at that. If familiar with the intersection he was referring to it was not Novi Road and 12 Mile it was Clark and Whipple and might have a couple of cars there. He felt under those kind of circumstances he wanted the Ordinance Review to see if there was any type of relief, etc. that they could incorporate into the present Ordinance yet still provide safety to people involved.

Councilman Toth asked what the obstruction was.

Councilman Crawford said it was a lilac bush and if coming from Whipple to Clark street and wanted to make a left hand turn it could obstruct the view. However, traffic would probably be going two miles an hour at that point and so would the people on Clark St. because they are about ready to stop at Grand River. He said it was a unique situation and the ordinance did not provide for anything, trimming, signage, etc.

Councilman Schmid agreed it should go to committee but the legal ramification had to be looked at very closely. He said if the bush was obstructing the view the city would be liable.

Councilwoman Mason said the ordinance said "no fence, wall, shrubbery, sign or other obstruction above a height of two feet from the established street break shall be permitted within the triangular area formed at the intersection of any street right-of-way lines by a straight line drawn . . .

Mayor McLallen stated the issue was that the Ordinance Review Committee review this particular ordinance and find that in low traffic, low areas if there was any possible way for a waiver to be granted.

Councilwoman Mason asked if a waiver meant the bush didn't get cut?

Councilman Crawford said he wasn't getting into the particulars of what they might suggest he was just asking if the Committee could take a look at that ordinance and see if it was possible to provide relief in certain situations.

Councilman Mitzel thought it was more than just Clark and Whipple. This fell under one of the City Councils goals for the Administration which was consistent ordinance enforcement and he felt there were many intersections within the City that had site obstruction.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

2. Budget Process - Mayor McLallen

Mayor McLallen said Councilman Toth had a rather lengthy budget review proposal and because she believed that was a fairly significant issue Council ought to discuss. She requested that Council hold this over to another meeting. However, she wanted to discuss approaching the whole process differently than Council had in the past before they went into the budget season but didn't feel midnight was the appropriate time to begin the discussion.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Toth

Seconded by Councilman Mitzel

That discussion of the Budget Review Process be held

over to another meeting.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Mr. Klaver said he had nothing to report.

Councilman Mitzel said he sent a memo saying he would ask certain questions and some had been answered. He asked what the status was of the Lakes Survey that was conducted seven months ago. He asked that Mr. Klaver provide the answer of where that was at. Also, one of the memos said that M-5 might be placed on hold and he wondered what the projected date was for M-5 to be completed up to the northern end of the City.

Mayor McLallen stated she was at a meeting with MDOT a couple of weeks ago. At the moment there was no funding in the next budget cycle to take that forward and it was on an indefinite hold as of now.

Councilman Mitzel noticed in the Planning Department's monthly report that there had been a Vic's site plan amendment that had been recommended to Council by the Planning Commission as of last December. He said it had not been acted on by Council and he asked why it was hanging out there.

Councilman Mitzel said in Mr. Nowicki's memo concerning Highland Hills which was in the Consent Agenda he asked that Council consider sending a resolution or message to the local legislature asking that they no longer require local governments to participate opening, widening or approving state trunk line highways because we are required to pay for part of resurfacing I-96. He said, if Council agreed, they should prepare a resolution in support of that.

Councilman Mitzel said the Police and Fire Committee had been going a great job providing Council with updates on their meetings but said to make sure they were posted according to the Open Meetings Act.

Mr. Klaver said they had been.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the City Administration be asked to prepare a resolution to be brought to Council concerning local government participation in state trunk line projects.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Councilman Toth said he thought it was about time that Mr. Kriewall provide Council with a complete detailed report on the Lansing lobbyist and the monies expended to date. He wanted to know what had been done since the lobbyist was hired and also what had been done for the Expo Center because they were sharing the cost. At the same time, he suggested Council consider some kind of timely report either quarterly or semi-annually.

Secondly, Councilman Toth said his understanding was that M-5 would not be completed. The rumor was that M-5 did not have sufficient money and were threatening that if they didn't get their tax increase M-5 would not be completed. He asked that Administration report back on the status of this.

Mr. Klaver said they would.

Councilman Toth expressed concern regarding the parking lot where the old recycling site was. He said it had never been fully cleaned up and there was equipment stored there. He asked if that was an equipment storage center now. He said it was looking sort of trashy back there.

Mr. Klaver said he would report back on that.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Klaver to find out who was responsible for cutting weeds along M-5 and Summit Drive. He said the weed were 4 to 6 feet high.

Mr. Klaver said he would report back on it.

Councilwoman Mason said she read somewhere that MDOT would not be responsible because there was no money and it was up to the City to do it.

Mayor McLallen said that was correct and the letter was from Mr. Nowicki.

Mr. Klaver said he would clarify that.

ATTORNEY'S REPORT - None

License

Councilwoman Mason removed from the agenda because she had not voted yes for anything for Main Street and would not start now.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the Resolution for an address correction for Vic's

Eat, Inc. be adopted.

That the request from VIC-EAT, Inc. for Address Correction: New full year Class C License to be located at

42875 Grand River, Unit #1, Novi, MI. 48375, Oakland County

in addition to prior approval already granted as per attached

copy of Resolution adopted on February 27, 1995 be considered

for approval.

Yes (5) No (1-Mason) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Councilman Toth removed from Consent Agenda to vote against

the resolution.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

That Resolution Budget Amendment 96-2, $2,000 from Contingency to City Manager Personal Services be adopted.

MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND

Councilman Toth removed from the Consent Agenda. He said the first time we went to an assessment center it cost about $3,200. Now that cost was well over $10,000. His concern was perhaps the assessment center was a valid method but there had to be some cheaper way of doing it. At that rate of inflation, 300% since we started assessment centers, he didn't think the City could afford it. He said what about 3 years from now it would be up around $20,000. He said it was a rising cost that should never have been allowed to get this high and felt it should be held down to under $4,000.

Mayor McLallen said the assessment was to cover the possibility of having to assess 22 officers in the next year and the cost were outlined in a memo from Chief Shaeffer. She said of the bids received for that type of service this was the low bid. It was not for a single individual it was for up to 22 possible reviews.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Crawford

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the proposal for Detective Assessment Center be awarded to Jack Clancy and Associates for $10,200.

Councilman Schmid said he supported for discussion and that he had not read it in detail. He asked if there was a possibility of 22 appointments.

Mayor McLallen said no, it was two positions but the assessment was of 22 possible applicants. She said 22 officers were eligible to fill 2 positions in the detective rank and 2 positions which were the DARE and NET positions. She said 4 detectives were eligible to retire so it appeared there were actually 6 possible promotions or openings.

Mr. Klaver reminded Council that they had used the assessment centers and they have historically demonstrated over and over again to be a much better predictor of future success than any other system. He said they used it to establish the seniority list that was then used for the next two years for any promotions of that particular rank. Mr. Klaver said it was not only the two positions but possibly four more positions and could have other positions over the next to years. These would be promoted from the same list established by the assessment center.

Councilwoman Mason asked how many people were interviewed the last time.

Mr. Klaver asked for what position.

Councilwoman Mason said for any position. She asked why they weren't taking the people that were interviewed that didn't make the positions last time and using them this time.

Mr. Klaver said when the list expired they agreed by contract to renew it and it was only good for a two year period. At the end of the two year period the list had to be renewed.

Councilwoman Mason asked renew what?

Mr. Klaver said the list; another assessment center was done and a new eligibility list was established.

Councilwoman Mason asked what if they didn't?

Mr. Klaver said the City had agreed in their contracts, labor agreements, that this was the system they would use for promotions.

Councilwoman Mason said it was agreed that it had to be an assessing company that did it. She asked if that was in the contract?

Mr. Klaver said no, not the company. It was agreed to do an assessment center, however one of the major purposes of doing an assessment center was not to be relying on their own personnel.

Councilwoman Mason asked if the Union was telling them they had to assess.

Mr. Klaver said the City agreed to that process in the labor contract which was ratified along with the unions. He said they agreed to the assessment process and preferred to hire an assessment center company to come in and perform the assessment center. He said they agreed in the contract that that would be their procedure.

Councilwoman Mason said the union contract did not say the City had to spend $10,000 to have an assessment center and that we could do it ourselves. She asked if the contract said every time a position was open that the City had to access through an assessment center?

Mr. Klaver said no. It said they did an assessment center, and established an eligibility list which was good for two years. At the end of two years that expired.

Councilwoman Mason said then it didn't say there had to be an outside assessing center.

Mr. Klaver said no.

Councilman Toth said there wasn't that big of a turnover in the police department if they were assessed two years ago. These figures might be OK for stepping into a new police department and reassessing everyone. He said most of this data already exists in the files and now to spend X number of dollars and take the same 22 people and reassess them again and again; once they had been assessed he could see where they might want to do some reassessment but to spend $10,000 to pick a couple of people for a job was ridiculous. Councilman Toth said if the City agreed to an assessment center he thought they should look at coming in with some kind of reasonable cost and looking for someone to do it for that figure. He said these figures were extremely high.

Councilman Schmid said the memo stated there were 2 openings now that they were going to do this for and a possibility of 4 retirements. He said it looked like they were paying $10,000 for either 2 openings or 6 openings. He realized they might interview all 22 people. He said there was a conflict here to because the memo clearly says that it was a union agreement and in the contract.

Mr. Klaver said that was correct.

Councilwoman Mason said it was a confusion because we only agreed to access for positions not who would do it so that memo was a little confusing and side tracking. She said they just said assessing and this Council thinks that meant the company; what it really meant was the Chief could assess.

Councilman Schmid asked if it was critical that this be passed tonight?

Mr. Klaver said one of the positions was scheduled to be replaced. He said their problem was that the DARE position was critical because of the training and they wanted to get someone trained to take over the next class if it becomes available. He said that timing was kind of critical.

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Schmid

Seconded by Councilwoman Mason

That this matter be postponed to August 7, 1995, next regular meeting with Chief Shaeffer present to explain the issues voiced tonight.

DISCUSSION

Councilman Crawford said since there was such major discussion on such a simple item that had been done in the past he wanted to read more of the memo. "As required by the labor agreement between City of Novi and the Police Officers Association candidates must complete an assessment center selected by mutual consent between the City and the Union. Twenty-two officers are eligible and have indicated their intent to compete in this process." It went on to say "I have met with the union officers regarding the bids. We are in total agreement on recommending Jack Clancy and Associates. There are two primary reasons for selecting Clancy: 1) He submitted the lowest bid and 2) the Novi Police Department had previously used Clancy to conduct the assessment center for Sergeant. The participants, the union and the police administration were impressed with the quality of the product. " Councilman Crawford said we have done this and it was how we assessed these people. It took a lot of the in house personal bias out of it. He said he didn't know that this was a major expenditure to take $10,000 to make sure that a position as important as detective was assessed properly. He said two had to be filled and possibly more and it was good for two years and there were 22 people to select from.

Councilman Mitzel said he would support the motion but he was specifically concerned with whether this cost was for 2 positions or 6. He asked for a clarification on the discussion that Mr. Klaver and Councilwoman Mason had.

Councilwoman Mason thanked Councilman Crawford for reading to Council and that if he thought it was just a little money then it ought to come out of his pocket. She said anytime there was anything under $100,000 Councilman Crawford wanted everyone on the Council to be ashamed that they do not give the money away.

Mayor McLallen said members of Council are not supposed to disparage one another.

Councilwoman Mason asked if she thought it was OK for Councilman Crawford to reprimand Council and say you silly people you don't want to pay $10,000. She said no it wasn't OK and it was disparaging all of Council.

Mayor McLallen agreed all members of Council should guard against that.

Councilman Crawford asked Mr. Klaver if the cost was based on just the process or the number of people?

Mr. Klaver said both components were calculated. He said it would not be proportional and would not be twice as much to do 20 people as it would to do 10. He said there was a certain number of costs that would remain the same. He said there were teams of assessors, 2 or 3 individuals, generally breaking up into two different teams so there would be 4 to 6 people involved as well as someone supervising the process. They do it generally over a two day period and the candidates would move through different exercises and situations where they would have to perform certain tasks. They would be evaluated by one team of assessors for one task and another team for another. He said there was a fairly large number of people involved and generally it was the better part of 2 days to conduct it. He said the larger the number of candidates the more assessors were needed and that was an obvious personnel cost for the assessment center company.

Councilman Crawford asked how many times an assessment center had been used in the last 5 or 6 years?

Mr. Klaver said 4 or 5 times.

Councilman Crawford asked what was usually paid?

Mr. Klaver said the one he recalled was for lieutenants and it was about $8,000 and it was a smaller number of eligible candidates.

Councilman Crawford asked when it was indicated to Administration that 22 officers wanted to compete in this it could not be narrowed it down.

Mr. Klaver said anyone that met the qualifications would have to be allowed to become candidates.

Yes (5) No (1-Crawford) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

12. Approval of Resolution vacating Ivy Leaf Walkway - Idlemere

Park Subdivision

Councilwoman Mason removed this item. She said she would like to see this item held off until the gentleman who owns the property gets rid of all that heavy debris; then, vacate Ivy Leaf Walkway.

It was then,

Moved by Councilwoman Mason

Seconded by Councilman Toth

That the Resolution to vacate Ivy Leaf Walkway be postponed until the property was cleaned up and then vacate.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried unanimously

Councilwoman Mason said she had been called down there by Mr. Halvangis after the big rain and she had pictures for Council to look at. She said there was a mud slide into their front yard and all over their driveways and into their houses and into their basements. She said something had to be done in that area about drainage or engineering.

COMMUNICATIONS

1. Letter from Rob Mitzel Re: Lake Property uses

2. Copy of Letter from City Attorney to Eddie Rhea, candidate

for council Re: nepotism

3. Copy of letter from Lynn F. Kocan to the Novi News Re: 24

hour operation

4. Copy of letter from Chief Shaeffer to Edward Kriewall Re:

Traffic Safety Awards

5. Letter from Robert W. Kuhlenschmidt Re: problems with water,

electricity and telephone service

6. Letter from Bill Halvangis Re: Austin Drive drainage

problems. Councilman Mitzel asked that Council receive a

7. Letter from Becky Draper Re: proposed sidewalk on Village

Wood Road

8. Letter from Timothy Donovan Re: proposed sidewalk on

Willowbrook Drive

9. Letter from Mr. & Mrs. David C. Garascia Re: proposed

sidewalk on Willowbrook Drive

10. Letter from Tonni L. Burns accepting appointment as City

Clerk effective July 31, 1995

11. Letter from David & Karen Allen Re: proposed water park

12. Letter from Mr. & Mrs. Richard Bowen Re: proposed sidewalk

Willowbrook Drive

ADJOURNMENT

It was then,

Moved by Councilman Mitzel

Seconded by Councilman Schmid

That the meeting be adjourned at 12:30 a.m.

Yes (6) No (0) Absent (1-Pope) Motion carried

Mayor

CLERK

Date approved: