Mayor McLallen called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.

ROLL CALL: Mayor McLallen, Mayor ProTem Crawford, Council Members DeRoche, Kramer, Lorenzo, Mutch, Schmid

PRESENTATION

1. Miss America Scholarship Program - Ginny Morris

The current Miss Farmington and first runner-up gave a brief presentation about their experience with the Miss America Scholarship Program. Mayor McLallen suggested that they also contact local schools and the Chamber of Commerce.

2. Keep Michigan Beautiful Award - Crosswinds West Condominium Association

Robert Dietrich, President of Crosswinds West Condominium Association stated they appreciate the opportunity to represent Novi as recipients of the Keep Michigan Beautiful Award. Mr. Dietrich thanked the residents of Crosswinds for their support.

Mayor McLallen noted Crosswinds has consistently won Novi’s Beautification Award and she thinks it was time to have them recognized outside the community.

3. Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 1997 - Plante & Moran, LLP

Mr. Heffernan introduced Mike Walsh who directed the audit and Scott Jansen who assisted in the audit. Mr. Heffernan advised the audit involved two major phases. One was the review of the financial systems of the city to make sure there were no significant deficiencies in those systems. Mr. Heffernan reported they found no deficiencies in terms of the financial structure and systems for handling the cash and other assets of the city. Secondly, they reviewed the financial statements and tested the numbers in the accounting records. He advised the results of their review of the accounting records can be found in the city’s comprehensive annual financial report.

Mr. Heffernan referred to Page 13 and advised this is the first time they received the Government Finance Association Certificate for Excellence in Financial Reporting. Mr. Heffernan explained they received this prestigious award for excellence in financial reporting for the June 30, 1996 financial statement. Mr. Heffernan added that Council should keep in mind as they review the graphs that the financial health of Novi is excellent.

Mr. Walsh reported the first graph depicts a five year trend in the city. He noted they included the police, fire, library, parks and recreation funds with the General Fund for comparison purposes because many other cities within Michigan include them in that way. Mr. Walsh advised revenues for all these different categories have increased steadily over the past five years due primarily to population growth. He added the property tax revenue has increased 28%; the intergovernmental revenue has increased has increased 66% and the other revenue has increased almost 60% since 1993.

Mr. Walsh described and compared the different graphs from the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1997 with cities and villages within Oakland County and Michigan. Mr. Walsh noted the intergovernmental revenue, which is primarily a state shared revenue, is quite a bit less than the average for the cities and villages within Michigan and less than the average of Oakland county cities. Further, he reported the other revenue is also slightly less.

Mr. Heffernan added the reason the intergovernmental revenue is lower is because they just distribute half of it per capita around the state, but the other half is distributed based upon what they call relative tax effort to the extent that the millage rate is somewhat lower than the average. Mr. Heffernan explained this means that Novi will receive less than the average and is the reason the intergovernmental revenue would be a little bit less per capita. He added it is the negative of having a lower millage rate.

Councilman Schmid asked if he is suggesting that Novi has fewer taxes than other communities? Mr. Walsh agreed the millage rate would be slightly lower than the state wide average.

Councilwoman Mutch believes they should emphasize that the increase is because of growth and not because of tax increases. Mr. Heffernan added the increase is also due to increased assessed values.

Mr. Walsh noted approximately 2.8% of the growth is because of the increased market value that supposedly allows the existing properties to increase and the remainder is new property, new population, new houses and new businesses.

Mr. Walsh stated police and fire expenditures have increased approximately 7.7% per year; general government increased approximately 5.7% per year; recreation and culture increased 9.1%; public works increased 5.6%; and other public safety increased 8.0%. Mr. Walsh stated although revenues are steadily increasing, expenditures are also increasing to meet the demands of the population growth.

Mr. Walsh reported they compared the same categories with villages and cities within Oakland County and Michigan. He reported Novi spends slightly more per capita on police operations, they spend a little bit more than Oakland County’s average for fire operations and less than the state; they spend less than the state and county average for general government; they are above the state and county average for recreation and culture; they are below county and state for public works and for other public safety expenditures, they are higher than the county and state’s average.

Mr. Heffernan noted although recreation and culture is significantly higher, user charges also offset it. He advised Novi has an extremely aggressive parks and recreation program and that is the reason that category is higher.

Councilman DeRoche asked if the user fees as they compare with other cities are available? Mr. Heffernan replied they did not break that out. He explained the data comes from the Michigan Municipal League and they do not have the user charged revenue broken out. However, they can probably compare the total user charges, but added different communities have different amounts in that particular revenue item and therefore, it would be difficult to compare from city to city.

Mr. Walsh displayed a five year history of Novi’s fund balance for police and fire, parks and recreation, and the library. Mr. Walsh reported the 1993 fund balance was approximately $3.827M, in 1995 it was approximately $3.4M and it was almost $4.0M in 1997. Mr. Walsh reported the overall increase was approximately 4% from 1993 to 1997.

Mr. Walsh displayed a graph comparing Novi to cities and villages within Michigan and Oakland County. He reported Novi’s 1993 fund balance as a percentage of expenditures (total fund balance divided by total expenditures for those funds) was nearly 30%. Mr. Walsh said the state average was 12½%. In 1997, Novi’s fund balance was nearly 21% of their expenditures and about equal to the cities and villages within Oakland County and ahead of the state wide average of 15%.

Mr. Heffernan added they had additional comments and recommendations relative to the water and sewer funds for the city management’s consideration. They are: 1. Long Range Capital Planning where cities use an accounting technique to segregate assets (i.e., tap in fees, benefit fees or installation fees) that are being set aside for future capital planning. 2. Monthly Billings, some communities consider a monthly billing rather than quarterly. However, Mr. Heffernan noted when there is more of an administrative effort to read meters monthly, there is also an additional postage cost. Therefore, most communities normally consider it first for a commercial or an industrial customer because the cash flow that accrues to the city is well worth the additional administrative costs of a monthly billing. 3. Wholesale Cost of Water charged by Detroit is different for every community. Mr. Heffernan explained they have not reviewed the measuring factor since 1982 through 1988 and many communities are considering whether they should measure peaking factors for themselves. If they discover it is lower, Mr. Heffernan reported the next step would be to convince Detroit that they need to measure that again because the current charges are unfair to that city. He suggested that the city’s engineers try to measure those factors to determine if they are appropriate.

Councilman Schmid asked for a further explanation about the issue of fund balance. Mr. Heffernan replied fund balance does not represent cash, but is similar to a savings account in terms of the reason they would want a fund balance. He explained there are generally two reasons why they need fund balance. One is for cash flow purposes. He explained the cash coming into the city does not come in on an even basis. Mr. Heffernan reported property taxes come in from July through August 15 and state shared revenue comes in every two months. Mr. Heffernan said if they looked at the city’s bank account they would see that the daily cash balance fluctuates from high to low so they need enough fund balance to cover the low periods. The second reason they need a fund balance is for contingencies or emergencies. Mr. Heffernan added the level that many communities have used in terms of how much fund balance there should be has fluctuated from 10-15%. Mr. Heffernan reported Novi’s policy is to establish a projection and combine the general fund with the police and fire fund. He noted Novi has been targeting a 10% level.

Councilman Schmid asked what is a good barometer for a fund balance? Mr. Heffernan believes how much should be there is easier to say in theory than in practice. Mr. Heffernan explained in theory they would want the fund balance to be as low as possible so that the money is in the hands of the residents rather than the city. However, on the other hand they need it to be enough to cover cash fluctuations and emergencies.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked why is the intergovernmental revenue lower? Further, she noted they had stated it involved state revenue sharing and asked if they are receiving less grant money than others in the state? Mr. Heffernan replied state shared revenue is the largest portion of that (85-90%) and noted that number is actually up. However, he noted when they compare what they receive on a per capita basis, it looks low. He explained the per capita is lower because half the state shared revenue (sales tax distribution) is distributed on a per capita basis which is an even distribution among all the communities in the state and the other half is distributed on a per capita multiplied by the relative tax effort (millage rate divided by the state wide average). Mr. Heffernan noted the state wide average is approximately 12.7-12.8 and Novi receives less because they are significantly below that average.

Councilwoman Lorenzo added another factor is the lower millage rate; Mr. Heffernan agreed.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether Novi is receiving less grant money per capita on a state wide basis? Mr. Heffernan replied Novi is receiving a significant amount of the Community Development Block Grant and C.O.P.S. Grants. He said there are several other types of grants other communities have received because they have a much higher percentage of low and moderate income populations than Novi. He said if they looked at the grant receipt per capita, they would see much higher grants in communities such as Pontiac, Royal Oak, Inkster or River Rouge. Further, Mr. Heffernan advised one of the larger federal agencies that distribute the Community Development Block Grant in addition to several other programs to lower income communities would be Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Mr. Heffernan explained communities have to meet one of two requirements to receive money from HUD programs. He noted the one they look at most closely is low to moderate income and the second is the senior citizen population. Mr. Heffernan reported Novi has been using HUD money for several senior citizen programs, but Novi does not have as high a population meeting the low to moderate income requirements.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if comparing the amount of grant money Novi receives with a community with similar demographics would be useful? Mr. Heffernan agreed and added if they were to compare Novi with Farmington Hills or Birmingham, he believes they would find that Novi looks very favorable.

Mayor McLallen noted that a copy of this report will be available for public viewing at the Clerk’s office and the Novi Library.

4. SCATS - Road Commission for Oakland County

Mayor McLallen advised SCATS made a presentation to the community a couple of weeks ago.

Dave Allen, Director of Traffic Safety for the Oakland County Road Commission provided a brief history of the system, what the system can do and some of its benefits. Mr. Allen reported the Road Commission began a strategic planning process in the mid-1980's where their upper management met with representatives of the Oakland County communities to find out what is happening with economic growth and development. He reported they found that there were many road needs. Since then, Mr. Allen advised those meetings have continued and the needs are now more than a billion dollars. However, Mr. Allen reported they knew at that time that there would be no way they could meet all the needs with their funding. Therefore, the Road Commission began looking at other methods to improve the efficiency of travel on Oakland County’s roads. Mr. Allen reported they requested $2.0M to begin an advanced traffic management system in Oakland County. Mr. Allen advised they approved the request in 1990 and then began the FAST-TRAC project in Troy.

Mr. Allen further advised they selected an advanced traffic management system called SCATS. Mr. Allen reported SCATS is a computer-based system that operates in real time by adjusting signals based upon traffic demand and system capacity. Mr. Allen reported the regional computer can handle up to 128 intersections and serves as the basic method of communication between an engineer and a local intersection controller. Because of the size of the system, Mr. Allen added they found it necessary to purchase a management computer to help manage the system. He explained it collects faults, it conducts an analysis of the system and provides data backup. Mr. Allen reported the principal purpose of SCATS is to reduce stops and delays. Mr. Allen then explained how the system operates at intersections. Mr. Allen reported most of the intersections have pedestrian push buttons to avoid having to have a minimum green time for the signal so a pedestrian may cross from one curb line to another.

Mr. Allen stated the SCATS growth has been significant. He advised they began in 1992 with twenty eight intersections and it has expanded to almost three hundred intersections. Mr. Allen anticipates another fifty intersections by the end of next year. Mr. Allen advised some benefits of the system is a reduction in severity of accidents and reduced travel times. Mr. Allen stated although they received both positive and negative comments from their survey, most believe it is safer and a benefit. Further, Mr. Allen reported although the system does have its limitations because it cannot exceed the roadway capacity, it can still improve the traffic flow.

In summary, Mr. Allen reported SCATS is improving traffic management in Oakland County and the technology has proven to be beneficial. Mr. Allen then connected electronically with the SCATS system and provided Council with a real life demonstration of the system at the Novi Road and Grand River Avenue intersection.

Mayor McLallen asked if Mr. Allen can provide statistics that show the reduction in travel time and accident severity relative to Novi’s system? Mr. Allen replied they did not conduct a "before" study for Novi Road. However, he believes they could provide accident information.

A woman spoke from the audience and advised that they plan to conduct studies on Haggerty Road. Mayor McLallen suggested that they conduct their studies on a Saturday between ten and three because it is impossible to traverse Haggerty Road on the weekend during these peak periods.

Councilman Schmid asked how would the system address the holiday traffic in the Twelve Oaks Mall area? Mr. Allen believes that intersection may drive the cycle length of the whole Novi Road corridor because of the amount of traffic. Further, the phasing is complicated at that intersection because of the capacity and traffic flow. Mr. Allen stated they have noticed vehicles stop where the asphalt changes to pavement instead of where the stop bar is and consequently, they are in the process of adding a "Stop Here" sign to actuate the signal sign so traffic will pull up further. Mr. Allen noted they did not find a malfunction with the system, but added if a vehicle does not sit on the detector they would not have gotten a signal phase.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if it is regardless the number of cars in line? Mr. Allen replied if the first car is not at the stop bar, they will not detect it. He added the typical detection is one detection zone per lane, but they have put additional zones in left hand turn lanes because sometimes people tend to stay back from the stop bar because of vehicles coming across the left turn lane.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if the Road Commission developed any kind of pamphlet that explains the system to interested motorists? Mr. Allen provided pamphlets for distribution.

Councilman Kramer understands the SCATS system counts cars at the stop bar and asked if it counts each car that progresses across to determine traffic volume; Mr. Allen agreed. He explained it averages the last three to five cycles so that it is weighted.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Allen to meet with Lou Martin to see if there is a public cable program available for the residents; Mr. Allen agreed.

Jim Utley - 25614 Gina Ct., understood from the October 6 Council meeting that the builder would turn over the streets on tonight’s agenda. Mr. Utley reminded Council he is referring to the disrepair of the streets in Walden Woods I and the woodlands that have died out because of poor drainage. Mr. Utley provided photographs of the water congregating in front of his driveway to Council. He reminded Council that this problem has existed for more than a year and the developer has not yet notified him about how they will resolve this issue. Mr. Utley believes this is a question of liability and he thought there would be some kind of maintenance bond on the contractor by now so the residents could be assured that the problems with the roads would be resolved.

Mayor McLallen noted there is a report under Manager’s Reports from DPW regarding the issue of roads and the bonding for the roads before the city’s acceptance of them.

Mr. Utley stated they advised him that the water accumulated in front of his drive way was a result of over watering. Mr. Utley believes the water should drain because he did not over water and added the water is currently there at a time when no watering is taking place.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Mayor McLallen added Water and Sewer Refunding Bonds as Item 10 under Matters for Council Action. Mayor McLallen noted there is a letter from Mr. Walters regarding Item 3 under Matters for Council Action.

CM-97-11-348: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Agenda as amended

Nays: None

CONSENT AGENDA (Approval/Removals)

Mayor ProTem Crawford removed Item 4; Councilwoman Lorenzo removed Item 9. Councilwoman Mutch removed Item 1; Councilman Schmid removed Items 5, 12 and 16, and Councilman Kramer removed Item 3.

CM-97-11-349: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Schmid, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve Consent Agenda as amended:

2. Approval of Final Pay Estimate No. 4 and Final Balancing Change Order No. 1 for the Bassett Drain Maintenance Clean-Out Project

6. Approval of Cab Company License to Robert Frost-A. Abbey Transportation for up to 15 cabs subject to Police Department vehicle inspection and approval

7. Programing of 1998 Community Development Block Grant Funds

8. Schedule an Executive Session of City Council to immediately follow the Regular Meeting for the purpose of Property Acquisition and Litigation

10. Authorization to solicit bids for the Novi/Commerce Township Sanitary Sewer Extension

11. Award bid for Audio System to Thalner Electronics, in the amount of $19,939.02.

13. Award bid for Police Department Uniforms to Allie Brothers based on unit pricing

14. Approval to seek bids for Tree Trimming Program

15. Transfer of ownership of 1997 B - Hotel Licensed business (Novi Hilton) with dance Permit and Entertainment Permit without dressing rooms, from Standard Federal Corporation to Hotel Investors of Michigan, Inc., property located at 21111 Haggerty Road

17. Adoption of Street Naming Resolution, Re: Arena Drive

18. Approval of Claims and Accounts - Warrant No. 504

REMOVALS

1. Approval of Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of November 10, 1997

3. Adoption of Resolution authorizing a $25.00 fee for Non-Sufficient Fund Checks

4. Approval of Ordinance No. 97-124.10 - To amend the Sidewalk/Bicycle Safety Paths Ordinance to incorporate a "Figure XI-A" to govern the construction of boardwalks - I & II Reading and Final Adoption

5. Request for Approval of Ordinance 98-102.01 - To change the date for Primary Elections from September to August - I Reading

9. Approval of over sizing water main credit to Singh Development company in the amount of $20,063.00

12. Award bid for Document Imaging System to Matrix Imaging, in the amount of $66,919

16. Adoption of Resolutions, Re: Budget Amendments:

A. 98-08 - 96-97 Rollover Items in the amount of $ 609,991

B. 98-09 - City Clerk Ordinance Codification in the amount of $12,000, account number 101-215.00-816.800

C. 98-10 - Legal Fees in the amount of $75,000, account number 101-210.00-806.000

D. 98-11 - Fire Department Software in the amount of $5,000, account number 101-337.00-986.000

Mayor McLallen noted this fifth resolution has laid out the costs and a tentative alignment.

Ron Ozark - 24860 Taft Road, noted it appears as though they missed Lots 1, 2 and 6.

Mrs. Bartholomew advised they included all the lots, but they have renumbered them.

Lynda Racey - 24740 Taft Road, is disappointed that she had to pick up information from the city and believes the city should have forwarded it to the homeowners. Ms. Racey is also disappointed that the city was not able to keep the cost of this project at a reasonable level. She noted it is now over a quarter of a million dollars shared by twenty-two lots. Ms. Racey understands that each homeowner’s cost will equate to $12,000 and it does not include hook up or tap in fees so it could go as high as $20,000 per lot. Further, Ms. Racey noticed in the information she picked up that there was some discussion about correcting some drainage problems in this area. Although it is not a concern for her, Ms. Racey knows it has been a concern for some of the other owners and she thinks it is unfair that the city is trying to roll some other problems into this SAD. She also believes this is the reason for some of the increased costs and she should not have to bear that burden. Ms. Racey also is concerned about the alignment. She explained hers is the smallest lot and yet she is paying the same fee. She suggested that they prorate it by either property value, size of the lot or size of the house. She also thought the lot owners would be the ones to make this decision and not the city.

Mayor McLallen interjected that is a policy of the city and that the cost has always been calculated by the number of units involved. Ms. Racey believes they told them that the lot owners could decide how they would share the cost.

Ms. Racey believes if the city has money for SCATS, that there should be a way to make the SAD cost more reasonable for these residents. She explained these are older homes and doubts that homeowner’s in new subdivisions pay this amount. She argued that it is an extraordinary amount for some of these homes considering their market value.

PUBLIC HEARING: FEDERAL GRANT - LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT - POLICE DEPARTMENT EQUIPMENT

Chief Shaeffer reminded Council that each year the Police Department is allocated a formula grant. He explained that is a federal grant passed down to the states and then to individual police departments. Chief Shaeffer reported each police department is allocated funds based upon a formula that includes many items (i.e., population, crime rates, arrest rates, etc.) to decide how much funding that each community has available to them. Chief Shaeffer advised Novi was authorized $35,862 this year, but added it requires a matching amount which would amount to $3,985. Chief Shaeffer noted they specifically allocate this funding for specific purposes and in this instance the funds will be used for an inkless fingerprint system. The Chief reported the equipment available to them is one that they are adopting throughout Michigan and explained that a person’s hand is placed on the scanning device of the electronic system. He advised when they scan the fingerprints electronically, they are stored and then transmitted to the county and state. Chief Shaeffer reported the process is faster, and requires less filing and operation time. Chief Shaeffer advised the estimated cost is approximately $51,000 and added they have $35,000 from the grant, a matching requirement of $3,900 that will come from the police department’s operating budget and they will take $15,000 from asset forfeiture funds if Council approves

this transaction. Chief Shaeffer noted there will be no additional burden on the city’s general fund.

1. Request for Approval of Resolution No. 5 for S.A.D. #148, Salow’s Walnut Hill Lots 003, 004, 007-022 and Lots 052, 053, 056 & 057, Extension of Sanitary Sewer

Mayor McLallen noted the SAD will service twenty-two parcels on the east side of Taft Road and the estimated cost is $260,744 or approximately $12,000 per parcel. She added that sum does not include the cost of a tap fee or the physical connection to the sanitary sewer. Mayor McLallen reminded Council that one lot owner raised the questions of why there was an increase in cost from the original projection, how was the alignment determined and how did the city achieve the policy of costing these per lot rather than lot footage during the public hearing.

Dave Potter of JCK & Associates is before Council to respond some of the issues discussed regarding the proposed Salow’s Walnut Hill sanitary sewer. Mr. Potter reported the process for design for engineering projects in Novi is a result of a resolution initiated by Council. He explained they require that they go through a series of three design procedures: conceptual, preliminary and final. Mr. Potter advised residents may initiate a request for SAD type projects at which time the engineers prepare a conceptual design. Mr. Potter advised the purpose of a conceptual design is to determine what side of the road they will put it on, potential utility conflicts, ground conditions and so forth. He explained they generate a cost estimate based on how they would construct the project whether it is water, sanitary, road or drainage. Mr. Potter recalled the residents proposed Salow’s Walnut Hill and it began with the north half of the project. Mr. Potter added the project grew as more residents from the south learned about this.

Mr. Potter reported the additional costs became evident as they went through the design process. He explained at some point during the preliminary design they collect soil borings and conduct a more detailed investigation of existing utilities in terms of how that construction might affect adjacent structures or the road. Mr. Potter advised it became obvious that they had to shift the sanitary construction over to avoid a water main and a variety of mature trees, but as a result they would lose a portion of the edge of the road pavement. Mr. Potter reported because Taft Road is scheduled for resurfacing in 1999,

it became evident that putting it where they have currently proposed it was more logical. Mr. Potter advised the current cost is $12,000 and the tap charges will amount to approximately $3,500 and the residents will also bear the cost of redirecting their sanitary from being discharged to an existing septic field to the front. Mr. Potter believes the ultimate cost could range from $15,000-$20,000. Mr. Potter noted the average cost of replacing a septic field could amount to as much as $10,000-$15,000 and may have to be replaced one to three times during a lifetime of a septic field.

Councilman Schmid asked Mr. Potter to comment on the indication that the homeowner’s may be taking on the additional drainage problems. Mr. Potter replied as they are constructing a sanitary sewer, the trench will destroy the existing ditch and that would mean they have to reestablish the ditch.

Councilman Schmid asked if Mr. Potter believed there would be an additional cost. Mr. Potter advised there have been several drainage concerns in one area. Mr. Potter explained this is a road side drainage ditch that has to be re-cut once they backfill the sanitary sewer. He advised they will compact it and cut the drain to reestablish the existing drainage patterns.

Councilman Schmid understands that there would then be no additional costs; Mr. Potter agreed.

Councilman Schmid asked if the $260,744 is only an estimate and therefore, it could be higher or lower; Mr. Potter agreed.

Councilman Schmid recalled there has been different approaches to charge the individual homeowners (i.e., by front footage, by lot). Mr. Kriewall agreed and added they can assess them based on either front footage or unit benefit basis. He noted they normally leave that decision to the assessor, but they typically assess water and sewer on a benefitting unit basis because there is no more benefit to a person with a hundred foot lot than a person with an eighty foot lot. Mr. Kriewall noted street assessment is somewhat different and explained an owner with a larger lot would have a greater benefit along the street.

Councilman Kramer asked if they have resolved the concern about the mature trees? Mr. Potter described the configuration they designed so they would avoid disturbing the trees.

Councilwoman Mutch understands they would have to recut the ditch even if the drainage were perfect and added it may be an additional benefit because the drainage may improve; Mr. Potter agreed.

CM-97-11-350: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Schmid, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adopt Resolution Number 5 determining the necessity, approving the necessary plans and directing the Assessor to prepare a fifteen year and twenty year payoff of the Assessment Role for Salow’s Walnut Hill sanitary sewer extension Special Assessment District 148

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Since this is an expensive project per lot, Mr. Kriewall suggested that they consider having the assessor prepare the role with a fifteen year and a twenty year payoff. The makers of the motion agreed.

Nays: None

Mr. Kriewall reported the next step would be the preparation of a special assessment role by the assessor and it will be brought back before Council by the December 15 meeting. After reviewing the role, Council will then consider an additional resolution to set a final public hearing for some time in January. Mr. Kriewall noted the residents can come before Council at that time to comment on the special assessment role and if the role is acceptable to Council at that third and final public hearing, Council will confirm the special assessment.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if they could confirm whether the costs passed on to a new homeowner is similar? Mr. Kriewall replied they build the cost of building a sewer in a new subdivision into the price of the house and that it would be the same cost. Mr. Kriewall added that the lineal costs in a new subdivision are for both sides of the street and can be divided by two.

2. Request for Allocation of Federal Grant - Local Law Enforcement Block Grant monies in the amount of $35,862 to be used for fingerprint equipment

Councilwoman Mutch asked if this system will improve the accuracy of fingerprinting. Chief Shaeffer replied it does.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if there are any other benefits? Chief Shaeffer replied it is much faster in that they store it electronically in the state’s system and fingerprints can then be searched electronically. In addition, the storage eliminates the manual filing processes.

CM-97-11-351: Moved by Schmid, Seconded by Lorenzo, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To accept and match funds for the 1997 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant to purchase fingerprint equipment for the Novi Police Department.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Kramer asked if they need to include the matching funds? Mayor McLallen agreed.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked if the grant was considered with this project in mind or were they given a lump sum and they decided they wanted to use it for this system? Chief Shaeffer replied they were given specific purposes for their application and noted they could have used the money for other types of electronic equipment, but they did not have any need for more computers.

Nays: None

3. Request for Approval of Consent Judgment Agreement - Briarpointe Veterinary Clinic for overnight stays of small animals

Dr. Parker reported they have not received any complaints from nearby residents about overnight stays for small animals at their facility during the trial period.

Councilman Schmid will not support the motion because the ordinance does not allow for overnight stays of small animals.

4. Request for Approval of Final Preliminary Plat - Cheltenham Subdivision

George Norberg of Seiber Keast and Associates advised Mr. Nanda is anxious to move forward with the construction and added they are currently reviewing the construction plans. Mr. Norberg advised they have reviewed the consultant’s letters and they have no objection to any of the recommendations.

Mayor McLallen asked if they have resolved the issue about the length of the cul-de-sac? Mr. Norberg replied they granted the waiver at tentative preliminary plat.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked whether the two on site detention basins will become permanent if the proposed regional basin does not come on line? Mr. Norberg replied they designed them to become permanent detention ponds and the applicant is aware of that.

Councilwoman Lorenzo asked if the reference made by Mr. Pargoff at the Planning Commission meeting of May 21 that the down spouts and gutters would be directed into storm sewers of the individual houses and they would put the sump pump discharge into the city’s storm water system along the road as drain opposed being toward the woods was accurate. Mr. Norberg agreed and added that storm lines had to be brought down the side lot lines individually to accomplish that in two instances. He added there will be a note on the plan indicating those connections must be made.

Nays: Schmid

5. Request for Approval of Tentative Preliminary Plat and Woodlands and Wetlands Permits for Westmont Village Subdivision #2 - SP 97-05B, Property located south of Ten Mile Road and West of Taft Road

Mayor McLallen noted there is no need for a wetland’s permit at the site. Further, due to a misunderstanding in the City Council process versus Planning Commission process, the Mayor advised homeowners did not speak during Audience Participation and offered their representative the opportunity to speak before Council at this time.

David Paul - 45761 Willingham Drive, stated as representative of Westmont Village they are asking Council to vote against the proposal before them. He advised Council has the authority to declare all of the area behind Lots 21-28 as regulated woodland under Section 37-6a of the Woodland’s Ordinance. Mr. Paul referred to paragraph two on page one of the October 13 joint letter that Ms. Lemke and Mr. Pargoff submitted. Further, Mr. Paul submitted the Oakland County GIS survey photos that shows Section 28 and Lots 21-28 in Westmont Village. Mr. Paul advised the photos show excess intrusion into the regulated areas at the end of Westmont Village and Willingham Drive. Therefore, Mr. Paul asked for Council’s support in declaring this area as wet-woodlands and deny the applicant’s request because of the lack of development responsibility shown thus far.

Mayor McLallen noted Greg Berry, as President of the Royal Crown Homeowner’s Association supports a cul-de-sac situation for the greatest preservation of trees in the area.

Richard Lewiston - Westmont Village subdivision representative advised the subdivision as presented was rejected by the Planning Commission on March 4, 1992 because there were concerns over the stub outlets. Further, by 1992 they were convinced that the remaining thirty four acres were a very complex area of woodlands and wetlands. In order to clarify the matter for Council, they filed a plan (not submitted as a plat) of what they called a Roadway Continuation Plan that indicated under minimal circumstances they could continue the stub roads into two cul-de-sacs. Mr. Lewiston restated that it was not intended as a plat, but was submitted as a probability that they could continue the roads in some fashion. Mr. Lewiston reported Council approved the plat on March 23, 1992 and upon reading the minutes of that meeting later, they were not certain which plat had been approved. Consequently, they came back before Council with another filing for clarification about which plat had been approved. Mr. Lewiston reported Council indicated that they had approved the sixty one lot plat on twenty six acres on May 18, 1992 and was developed as Westmont Village I. Mr. Lewiston reported they studied the remaining thirty four acres for two years and they were able to determine that there were eight acres that had tree growth with no wetlands and that became the basis of their proposed plat. Further, they were told there were twenty four trees that would require thirty two replacement trees. They also told them that the area north contained approximately another sixty eight trees of which many were dead and many more were of an inferior species. Mr. Lewiston reported they advised the Planning Commission that they would replace all ninety two trees with approximately 140 trees. Mr. Lewiston reported they will assume that every tree removed is a regulated tree and agreed with the Planning Commission that the road will be placed in a way so that there is no possibility of continuing development.

Mayor McLallen asked Mr. Fried to review what the parameters for approval or denial are for the outstanding issues for this applicant. Mr. Fried believes the issue before Council is about the request for a woodland permit. Mr. Fried noted that the woodland’s ordinance is drawn so that they cannot prohibit development of a property based upon the woodland’s permit. He explained if they do that they are in effect taking the property and the property owner has the right to go to court and either have the city change their position on the woodland’s permit or pay for the property. Mr. Fried advised that Council can require Administration to review the development and determine how the developer can reduce the effect of the development on the woodland.

Mayor McLallen noted that many of the consultants’ letters refer to 7.9 acres and she stated the developer has indicated a continued ownership of up to thirty four acres. The Mayor asked if they are considering this as development on a thirty four acre piece of which the development is only seven acres. Mr. Fried believes they should look at it as a seven acre development with the developer conceding within this plat that they would not develop the balance of the property.

Councilman Schmid asked for further clarification about the woodlands. Mr. Fried advised that Council has the authority to grant or reject a woodland’s permit. He stated if Council refuses to grant a woodland’s permit, then that would prevent the developer from developing the property who in turn could go to court and say the city has taken his property and therefore, he would like to be compensated for it. Mr. Fried noted that the city could also grant a permit that would have the least intrusion on the trees as possible and allow the developer to develop the property.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked if they can suggest a different layout and grant a woodland’s permit? Mr. Fried agreed and suggested that they send it to the consultants and have the consultants review it.

Mayor ProTem Crawford asked of the nineteen lots, how many will be developed with a potential cul-de-sac plan? Mr. Lewiston replied eleven lots.

Councilwoman Mutch believes some people think that Novi has an ordinance that prohibits the removal of trees in regulated woodlands. Councilwoman Mutch asked for further explanation about what the city prohibits or requires. Ms. Lemke reported regulated woodlands in Novi appear in light, medium and dark on the woodland’s map. She explained they regulate everything in those woodlands from the wildflowers to the canopy trees. Ms. Lemke stated that means they require a permit to remove any tree, any shrub or any ground cover within those areas. However, it does not mean that they do not permit development. Ms. Lemke noted they make that very clear to developers unless it is in a preservation easement. Ms. Lemke reported they require a permit from the Planning Commission for a site plan and they give the approval with her recommendations. Ms. Lemke believes the key word in the ordinance is the "best" alternative that saves the most amount of quality woodlands and she noted there are specific standards that guide them in their review. Further, Ms. Lemke advised they look at both overall and specific areas in that review. Ms. Lemke understands there is always an alternative, but added sometimes there is a best alternative that meets the needs of that particular woodland and all parties involved.

Councilman DeRoche asked if they consider the effect on existing housing with the removal of woodlands? Ms. Lemke replied they consider it by what the woodlands do. She explained they would consider them in terms of their screening function, and their heating and cooling function.

Mayor McLallen noted Ms. Lemke had four specific reasons for not granting a woodland’s permit. The Mayor reported a major concern of Ms. Lemke was that the applicant had not sufficiently addressed the drainage pattern from the development issue and its impact on the woods.

Ms. Lemke advised the drainage is still at a conceptual level and they do not look at that until they review the final engineering plans with JCK & Associates. She noted they raise the issue at the conceptual level so there is an awareness of it by the developer. Ms. Lemke advised it appears that they addressed it sufficiently at this point, but restated they look at it in further detail with final engineering drawings.

Mayor McLallen understands that the submitted request is for nineteen lots on 7.9 acres that each lot meets the R-3 requirements, and the road lay out meets city standards. However, the issue is with the impact on the woods. The Mayor asked if there are any other options that would permit the developer to construct the nineteen houses if he utilized the entire thirty four acres and yet stayed in this area by adjusting the lots under the open space criteria. Ms. Lemke replied she has not looked at those options specifically for this project. However, she has looked at different designs based on this zoning and there are a couple of other options besides the straight two cul-de-sacs.

Mayor McLallen recalled if the developer met Ms. Lemke’s requirements, they could pass this option. Ms. Lemke said that was correct, but the biggest objection is coming up with another design alternative and she is also looking to save a center portion of woodlands in the area. Further, another goal would be not to protrude too far into the south. Ms. Lemke explained since Novi has a woodland’s ordinance, the option is to save large contiguous areas.

Mayor McLallen asked if Ms. Lemke believes there is more room for improvement than what is currently before them. Ms. Lemke agreed and added although they are talking about a small area, there is still room to save additional area and still have adequate lots.

Councilman Schmid asked for Ms. Lemke’s opinion about the cul-de-sac plan. Ms. Lemke replied there is a large wetland system to the east, so to bring a cul-de-sac of any depth to the south would not be feasible. Ms. Lemke believes that bringing it from the south on the western boundary would be more feasible.

Councilman Schmid asked if the 1992 conceptual plan would work? Ms. Lemke replied it would not work on the eastern side because of the wetlands and therefore, getting wetland’s permit approval would be difficult. Ms. Lemke would like to see the cul-de-sac plan go into effect.

Councilman Kramer regrets that this plan got this far and he believes they are looking at a standard extension without looking at alternatives. Although he understands the developer has studied the property, the approach is standard and he would like to see some studied alternatives. He does not believe they have looked at this area in a way that would give the developer the best return on his property and the best way to preserve the basic essence of the natural resources that are there.

Councilwoman Lorenzo noted the record indicates that when the petitioner appeared before the Planning Commission and Council in 1992 that they advised the petitioner about the challenges that would exist if subdivision number one was planned piece meal. Councilwoman Lorenzo reminded Council that the petitioner provided a drawing to Council in 1992 that proposed stubs that the petitioner stated could be completed by the addition of eleven lots in non-regulated areas. Further, they know this Roadway Continuation Plan as the Cul-de-Sac Plan. Councilwoman Lorenzo believes the Roadway Continuation Plan continues to be a prudent and feasible alternative to the plat currently before Council. She added it appears that Mr. Lewiston voluntarily came forward with a plan that he considered acceptable and she thinks they should be looking toward that plan or a variation of that plan to see what types of intrusion they make into the wetlands. Councilwoman Lorenzo is willing to look at that type of alternative and hopes that the petitioner would also agree to look at that alternative especially since he was the one who proposed the eleven lots in the Roadway Continuation Plan which brought him the approval of the first subdivision.

CM-97-11-354: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Lorenzo, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To deny request for tentative preliminary plat and woodland’s per Planning Commission and woodland consultant’s recommendation

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Mayor ProTem Crawford concurs with Council members Kramer and Lorenzo’s comments and hopes the petitioner will provide a plat that will satisfy all of their concerns.

Councilwoman Mutch believes that receiving input from the adjoining residents to know what their priority is would be important. Councilwoman Mutch noted Ms. Lemke is looking at the woodlands from the perspective of the whole system and she thinks it is possible that some of the residents’ concerns have something to do with the removal of trees closer to their homes.

Councilman Schmid’s supports the motion because he is concerned about what Mr. Lewiston alluded to when he received approval on his original plan. Councilman Schmid hopes the petitioner can develop a plan that provides less intrusion on the homeowners who purchased those lots with some assurances that there would be woods behind them.

Nays: None

6. Request for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for Steve and Rocky’s - SP 97-47, Property located west of Town Center Drive north of Grand River Avenue

Mayor McLallen noted the main issue is the shared driveway between NBD and the new enterprise in the adjacent existing building.

John Fuleras advised he represents the applicant and noted Steve and Rocky’s is the progeny of two Rocky restaurants currently in existence. He described them as upscale destination type restaurants. Mr. Fuleras advised they came before the Town Center Steering Committee with the proposition that the site will have Grand River Avenue access and after much work, Steve and Rocky’s restaurant customers will use the existing NBD access road. Mr. Fuleras noted there has been ongoing confusion in terms of access to both sites.

Councilman Kramer believes this is a good example of how working together can bring a significant and positive result.

Councilman DeRoche agreed and also thinks it is an excellent proposal because of the confusion surrounding the current access to only NBD.

CM-97-11-355: Moved by DeRoche, Seconded by Crawford, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve preliminary and final site plan subject to additional review of final site plan by city staff and consultants for Steve and Rocky’s, SP 97-47

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Mutch agrees this is an improvement for both NBD and for the restaurant site. However, she then asked if there is any concern about cut through traffic and that they will address it in a way so that is not a concern. Mr. Arroyo replied there was a concern but he believes they have addressed the concern. He explained this issue came up during the discussions of the Town Center Steering Committee and Planning Commission. Mr. Arroyo believes the design is the best way to address it, but admits there will probably be a minimal number of motorists cutting through.

Councilwoman Lorenzo understands the elimination of ten parking spaces will have no impact on parking. Mr. Arroyo replied that is correct.

Nays: None

7. Request for Approval of Quota Class C Liquor License for Red, Hot and Blue - Tuo Gip One, L.L.C., property located in the Main Street Court Building on the south side of Grand River Avenue, east of Novi Road

Terrance Conlin is the attorney for the applicant and advised Red Hot and Blue is a bar-b-que, Memphis style restaurant with music memorabilia. Mr. Conlin added they opened their first restaurant in Sterling Heights three days ago and they have purchased another location at Twelve Mile and Southfield Roads.

Mayor McLallen added for the record that the applicant has submitted their liquor application and all the information has been presented properly. The Mayor noted the city currently has four Class C licenses available and if they approve this application, it would take their total down to three.

Mr. Conlin reported there is a small mistake in the seating plan and advised it is their intention to have 160 seatings instead of 147. He added the Fire Department will permit 215 seatings. Khanh Pham stated there is no problem in making that adjustment.

Councilman Kramer believes the applicant meets the uniqueness requirement for a liquor license.

CM-97-11-356: Moved by Kramer, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To grant conditional local approval for a Quota Class C Liquor License for Red Hot & Blue pursuant to Section 3-14(j) of the Novi Code of Ordinances

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid asked the applicant to comment further on the seating capacity. Mr. Conlin replied the total square footage is 5,115 square feet and according to the drawings 1,530 square feet is for the kitchen. Mr. Conlin reported under the Michigan law there are fifteen square feet per person to allow additional seating and that would technically put them at 200 plus people, for which they have no intention on doing.

Councilman Schmid asked if increasing the seating capacity impacts the parking? Mr. Rogers interjected, the parking is based upon gross floor area for the gross of Novi Main Street.

Councilman Schmid stated his question is about whether they looked at this? He wondered if they had 200 plus seats, would they use the entire gross permitted. Mr. Rogers restated the parking was not based upon the individual stores, but that it was based upon the gross square footage and the shared parking formula. Therefore, Mr. Rogers does not believe that it will change the minimum parking. Councilman Schmid just wants to be certain that there is adequate parking.

Councilman Schmid asked if there are other Red Hot & Blue’s open in other areas? Mr. Conlin replied the first opened by his client was opened four days ago and is strictly a restaurant.

Mr. Conlin noted they would not object to having a condition that they would not exceed 167 seats.

Nays: None

8. Request for Approval of a Variance from Chapter 11: Design and Construction Standards Ordinance for General Filters development expansion, Property located north of Grand River Avenue and west of Novi Road

CM-97-11-357: Moved by Crawford, Seconded by Schmid, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve a variance from Chapter 11: Design and Construction Standards Ordinance for General Filters development expansion, property located north of Grand River Avenue and west of Novi Road

Nays: None

9. Request for authorization to solicit bids for the sale of Fire Station Number 1

Mayor McLallen advised Council has discussed this issue at length and the preliminary reviews have indicated that the minimum bid should be $1.1M. The Mayor explained this is merely a step that Council takes for soliciting bids and is not a step to award them.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilman Schmid asked if the amount is sufficient? Mr. Fried replied they believe this is an adequate amount to rebuild the fire station.

Mr. Klaver added they are confident that the $1.1M will not only cover the cost of construction but will also provide for the financing. Mr. Klaver further stated that the Fire Chief is concerned about the access coming in and out of the station, and the ability to combine this with the proposed training facility between the existing DPW and Eleven Mile Road offer wonderful opportunities to combine both facilities.

10. Water and Sewer Refunding Bonds

Mayor McLallen introduced Denny Neiman from Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. and Colleen Stacer of Bendzinski and Company.

Mr. Neiman advised Council has previously approved the ordinance they filed with the Michigan Department of Treasury and added they provided several drafts of the preliminary official statement that Administration helped to develop. Further, Mr. Neiman reported they priced the deal and Mr. Gibson approved the pricing subject to Council’s approval this evening.

Mr. Neiman advised they have made one change since they were last before Council. He explained the bonds mature each year from 1998 through 2012, and the 1998 and 1999 maturities are not callable and therefore, they must stay at their current rates. However, Mr. Neiman noted that the 2000 bonds and beyond are callable. Mr. Neiman advised at the time they authorized the bonds, the 2012 maturity of one half a million dollars did not make economic sense to refund. As a result, they authorized not to exceed $5.0M which was enough to cover the $4.5M of bonds for 2011 maturities plus the cost of the escrow. Mr. Neiman said in the interim it has become economically feasible to call the 2012 maturity and noted they saved $20,000 by calling that maturity. Therefore, Mr. Neiman advised they are not only refunding the 2000 through 2011, but also the 2012.

Mr. Neiman advised the ordinance before Council does several things. He explained it approves the refunding, the interest rates and arranges the 4.05 to 5.15. In addition, It approves an amended treasury filing. However, Mr. Neiman added they have to get the Michigan Department of Treasury to approve the higher amount. He noted they have spoken with the treasury department who advised they are amendable, but they need to file the form which Council needs to approve. Mr. Neiman reported It also authorizes the bond purchase agreement which is on file with the City Clerk which sells the bonds to First of Michigan Corporation and Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc. It also approves the escrow agreement they discussed in October. Mr. Neiman explained the escrow agreement is the bond proceeds of which most go into trust with Michigan National Bank who in turn purchases U.S. Treasury obligations that mature in amounts at a time in which interest rates can sufficiently cover the outstanding bonds they will be refunding to the first call date which is July 1999. Mr. Neiman added it also approves the preliminary official statement which was circulated November 14, the final official statement in process and held by Mr. Gibson. Mr. Neiman further added they have purchased municipal bond insurance at a very attractive rate from FSA as a result of the city’s outstanding bond financial position in the water and sewer fund.

Colleen Stacer of Bendzinski and Company advised they priced the refunding bond issue on November 19 with First of Michigan and R.W. Baird. She reported they negotiated interest rates beginning in 1999 and ending in 2012 which at that time range from 4.05 in 1999 to a 5.15 in 2012. Ms. Stacer reported these interest rates are comparable to other issues that sold in the market and therefore, they bid a competitive interest rate. Ms. Stacer added they generate a cumulative savings of $196,141 which is savings net of all costs of issuing the bond to the city. Ms. Stacer advised that averages to a savings of approximately $13,000 annually.

Councilman Schmid asked what is the gross savings? Ms. Stacer advised the gross savings would include the issuance costs and a bond discount which the underwriter charges as a marketing and management fee of approximately $100,000. Therefore, gross savings would be $300,000 net of the issuance costs and the total savings to the city would amount to $197,000.

Councilman DeRoche asked if the city regularly uses First of Michigan for their bond issues? Ms. Neiman replied they were using First of Michigan when they were before Council in October. Ms. Stacer added the issue was a negotiated issue and they agreed earlier that they would negotiate with First of Michigan with R.W. Baird as a co-manager. Ms. Stacer advised in a negotiated process they elect the managers and underwriters up front to negotiate with them on the interest rate. She added part of their responsibility is to make certain that those underwriters are bidding comparable and competitive interest rates in the marketplace. She explained that is why they look to the indexes, other underwriters and other issues that sold that day to compare them.

Ms. Stacer advised there were other issues that sold the same day. She reported Lake Superior sold a revenue issue that was also negotiated with an AAA rating and Novi is exactly at their scale only Novi is cheaper in the year 2008 (Novi is at 4.80 and they are at 4.85). She also advised they compared Novi with an AAA issue by Calhoun County on that same day and Novi is right on with that scale, but better than that scale on the long end by five eights of a point. Mr. Neiman interjected, the goal is to be less expensive.

Mr. Neiman believes the city’s administration did a nice job of coordinating this. He explained the cost of insurance is very inexpensive and recognized how well they are running the system.

Mr. Neiman reported he will be before Council in three weeks with both the street bonds as well as the 1998 issue that he was before Council for at their last meeting. He explained those are bonds they would schedule to be sold in February. He added the one currently before Council is separate and distinct from those. However, Mr. Neiman noted there was thought given to holding the refunding issue, but they would run the risk of the market moving ten to fifteen basis points and they would then lose those savings.

CM-97-11-359: Moved by Lorenzo, Seconded by Mutch, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adopt ordinance for water and sewer refunding bonds effective immediately

Nays: None

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION - None

CONSENT AGENDA REMOVALS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: (Items listed on the Consent Agenda which have been removed for discussion and/or action)

1. Approval of Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of November 10, 1997

Councilwoman Mutch noted the Library Administrator’s name should read Brenda Evans and asked that they include that she could not attend the Council meeting because a Library Board meeting was scheduled at the same time.

3. Adoption of Resolution authorizing a $25.00 fee for Non-Sufficient Fund Checks

Mayor McLallen reported Steve Babinchak, City Treasurer is saying that it is not cost effective for the city to operate without a policy of this type.

Councilman Kramer agrees with the principle and commended Mr. Babinchak for proposing the fee. However, he questions whether the $25.00 fee is appropriate and noted Mr. Babinchak did not offer any basis for the fee. Councilman Kramer believes it appears somewhat high and requested that the amount be researched further.

Councilwoman Mutch recalled that the post office and many commercial establishments now charge a $25.00 returned check fee. She added that is in addition to what the bank will charge that person for a returned check.

Mr. Gibson said they had spoken with other communities and looked at their own costs in terms of staff time required to process the returned check.

Now that Councilman Kramer understands that they have conducted the research, he can support the motion and that the fee is appropriate.

Nays: None

4. Approval of Ordinance No. 97-124.10 - To amend the Sidewalk/Bicycle Safety Paths Ordinance to incorporate a "Figure XI-A" to govern the construction of boardwalks - I & II Reading and Final Adoption

Mayor McLallen noted this amendment will provide a configuration for a boardwalk.

Mayor ProTem Crawford noted that it appears to be a complete readoption of the ordinances that Council has previously adopted, but that it now includes boardwalks. Mayor McLallen agreed.

Mayor ProTem Crawford will not support the amendment because he thought it was too aggressive and intrusive the first time. Secondly, he will not support the amendment because of the most recent vote where voters did not support the safety path program.

Councilman Schmid will not support the motion because of the eight foot width of the paths. He added the city will also have a major maintenance problem in the future because of the asphalt material. Therefore, Councilman Schmid asked Council to reconsider the use of blacktop, especially on both sides of the street.

Although Councilman DeRoche was not a council member when they originally adopted the ordinance, he sees a major flaw. Councilman DeRoche is especially concerned with the eight foot width. He has never seen this before other than in select locations and therefore, concurs with Councilman Schmid’s remarks about the city’s responsibility for the maintenance.

Councilman Kramer regrets that Councilman Schmid was absent for the engineering discussion about roads and sidewalks. Councilman Kramer believes if there is an interest in reconsidering this ordinance that they should also bring back the engineering data.

Councilwoman Mutch agreed they are talking about sidewalks throughout the city, but noted they are not talking about sidewalks within subdivisions. Councilwoman Mutch believes before people decide eight feet is too wide that they should look at areas where eight foot sidewalks are in place and if possible, see them while they are in use so they can perhaps see someone running who may have to pass someone on a bicycle.

Councilwoman Mutch does not have a problem bringing this back for further review and reconsideration. Councilwoman Mutch understood that they agreed upon asphalt because it was the most responsible way in terms of cost. Councilwoman Mutch prefers concrete, but added that she knows it is very expensive. Councilwoman Mutch noted she would support a motion to bring this matter back for further discussion, but that she does not believe it is necessary.

Mayor ProTem Crawford agrees that Council should envision what it would be like to see an eight foot wide path (concrete or asphalt) twelve feet off the curb on both sides of the road and see what that would do to existing neighborhoods, woodlands and wetlands.

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Councilwoman Mutch asked if that would mean they would not require sidewalk/bicycle safety paths of any kind until they adopted a new ordinance.

Mr. Fried advised they would follow the ordinance already in effect; this is just amending that ordinance. He explained if they do not approve this, they will bring the ordinance back before Council to repeal the prior one.

Councilwoman Mutch understood they were just amending the ordinance to include this diagram for boardwalks. However, now she understands they are rejecting the entire ordinance.

Mayor ProTem Crawford explained this is an amendment to the amendment because they only approved an amendment a couple of months ago.

Councilwoman Mutch understands that they amended the ordinance and asked for further explanation.

Mr. Fried advised this is amending a prior ordinance and does not just include the drawing.

Councilwoman Mutch understands that, but also understands that they are now amending the amended ordinance again. Therefore, each time they have amended it they usually discuss it as the existing ordinance.

Mr. Fried stated if they do not approve this ordinance, he believes the consensus of the Council is that they do not want the prior ordinance. Therefore if Council desires, they will bring an ordinance repealing the prior ordinance.

Councilwoman Mutch restated her question is whether they still have an ordinance governing this. Mr. Fried replied they do have an ordinance in effect.

Councilwoman Mutch understands that as of this moment they have an amended ordinance in effect which does not include the boardwalk, but includes everything else. However, she asked if they reject what is before them tonight, what do they have? Mr. Fried replied the ordinance is still in effect and that they have not approved an amendment to that prior ordinance.

Councilwoman Mutch then understands that it is not the whole ordinance that they are rejecting.

Mayor ProTem Crawford understands that his motion is not to approve the amendment and if it passes, everything they did a couple of months ago no longer exists. He understands that the existing ordinance that was in effect a couple of months ago before that action is still in effect.

Mr. Fried suggested that they repeal the prior action to achieve that goal. Mayor ProTem Crawford stated that is what he will do if he must.

Councilman Kramer moved to table the matter; there was no second.

Councilman DeRoche believes five foot paths are appropriate and from all the feedback he received, they recently rejected the paths because of the eight foot size.

Mr. Fried advised the ordinance currently before Council is 97-124.10; the ordinance they adopted previously was 97-124.09. He advised that if Council wants to repeal 124.09, they need to say so. Mr. Fried explained an approved Ordinance 97-124.10 would annul 124.09 because they are amending it. If they do not amend it, then 97-124.09 would remain in effect because they did not repeal it.

Mayor ProTem Crawford would like to repeal 97-124.09 and withdrew his original motion.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if that would be in effect an act of rescinding an action of Council and that any member can make that action. Mr. Fried agreed.

Mayor McLallen asked if it requires a certain number of votes. Mr. Fried advised that they would act it upon like any other ordinance.

Mayor McLallen advised the motion is to rescind Ordinance 97-124.09 and added the ordinance requires the city to construct eight foot wide asphalt safety paths on both sides of all major roads. Further, the Mayor advised that 97-124.08 will remain in effect.

Councilwoman Mutch believes they should carefully consider whether paths should not be on both sides of the road. She explained by asking who should receive the benefit of having pedestrian access in terms of deciding which residents on which side of the road have a greater need or right.

Councilman Schmid will support the motion and the effort to review Ordinance 97-124.08.

Councilman Kramer will not support the motion because he believes the discussion should be supported by facts which he hopes will come back before them as they discuss the issue further.

Mayor McLallen will support the motion because of her concern about constructing eight foot paths on both sides of the road. Mayor McLallen suggested that Council bring this entire issue back very quickly and before the building season begins again. Mayor McLallen noted she has no issue with using asphalt and with construction on two sides of the road.

Councilwoman Mutch understands if they support this ordinance that the ordinance would still leave five feet on one side and eight feet on the other anyway. Therefore, they will still have areas where they will be requiring eight feet in some areas.

Councilman Schmid suggested that they bring back a proposal to change size and material.

Nays: Kramer, Mutch

5. Request for Approval of Ordinance 98-102.01 - To change the date for Primary Elections from September to August - I Reading

Councilman Schmid noted this is the first reading and believes they should have offered a reason. However, he then added that the Clerk explained to him that 99% of the communities hold their primaries in August. Councilman Schmid has mixed emotions and believes that running in September is much easier than in August. Although he opposes this action, he is not going to make a big issue of it. Councilman Schmid asked that the Clerk restate the reason for this action.

Mrs. Bartholomew replied she asked the city’s attorney to look at this matter. She explained it first came forward when they put the filing in and sent the notices to Oakland County. Mrs. Bartholomew explained the county then contacted her and advised that they had missed the filing date. She added the county was unaware that Novi held September primary elections. Mrs. Bartholomew checked with surrounding communities, the state and the county, and discovered that other than Pontiac and Detroit most other communities hold August primary elections. Her main motivating factor is that most Novi citizens vote in August because even year elections are held in August and November.

CM-97-11-364: Moved by Schmid, Seconded by Crawford, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adopt First and Second Reading of Ordinance 98-102-01 to change the date for Primary Elections for elective offices of the City of Novi from September to August

COUNCIL DISCUSSION

Mayor ProTem Crawford suggested that they make this both first and second reading; Councilman Schmid agreed.

Nays: None

9. Approval of over Sizing Water Main Credit to Singh Development Company in the Amount of $20,063.00

Councilwoman Lorenzo was concerned about reimbursement to the city at some point in time as well. She advised that she spoke with Dave Bluhm of JCK & Associates who reported that he is confident that the water tap fees will cover the cost of reimbursement in full at some point in the future. Councilwoman Lorenzo asked if Mr. Nowicki concurred; he agreed.

CM-97-11-365: Moved by Lorenzo, Seconded by Crawford, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To approve oversizing water main credit to Singh Development Company in the amount of $20,063

Nays: None

Mayor ProTem Crawford noted for the benefit of the two new council members that as of 11:30 P.M. Council should have voted to extend the meeting.

As a point of order, Councilman DeRoche does not believe Council has accepted or voted on the rules. Mayor McLallen noted the old rules are still in effect.

Councilman Schmid removed this item because he is curious about the difference in the amounts for the bids. Mr. Gibson understands that the other bids were for much larger systems. He added that representatives from the city saw the $66,000 system working and they believe it will meet their needs.

Councilman Schmid asked what is the difference between the $66,000 equipment and the $300,000. Mr. Gibson is not certain what the differences are and restated that they based their decision on the fact that the $66,000 system would meet their needs. However, Mr. Gibson noted the more expensive system included their own server and therefore, the city must purchase a server in addition to the $66,000 so that the total investment will amount to approximately $80,000.

Nays: Schmid

D. 98-11 - Fire Department Software in the amount of $5,000, account number 101-337.00-986.000

Councilman Schmid asked for further explanation regarding this request. Mr. Gibson reminded Council that during the audit presentation that the Fund Balance was higher than most of the other communities and advised this is part of the reason for that. He explained they basically have $600,000 worth of that Fund Balance which is what they refer to as a roll over item. Mr. Gibson advised that he gave the example of partial computer installation where they have to complete the program and it overlaps the year end. Mr. Gibson suggested that the fire truck may be a better example. He explained to be able to order a $160,000 fire truck they have to have it budgeted in last year’s budget to place the order, but it is not physically delivered by June 30. Therefore since the money is not actually spent before June 30, 1997, it rolls into Fund Balance. Mr. Gibson explained this amendment takes that item out of Fund Balance and they reprogram it into the current year to match when they have to actually make the payment for it.

Councilman Schmid asked to define unappropriated Fund Balance further. Mr. Gibson replied unappropriated Fund Balance is what they once thought of as extras. Mr. Gibson stated this is in addition to those items they have identified as being needed in fund balance once they finish the year, once they set aside the ten percent fund balance and once they have identified the amount they need to roll into the current year’s budget to balance (which is more than $1M). Mr. Gibson reported they have actually finished the year with $600,000 more than what they planned on because of the roll over items. Mr. Gibson noted that the budget amendment will use the unappropriated fund balance and will still retain a ten percent fund balance of over $1M.

Councilman Schmid asked for further explanation about the $75,000 in legal fees for a pending lawsuit. He explained they have received information in the mail from Mr. Klaver and understands that part or all of these monies may or may not be funded by the city’s municipal insurance or by another available policy with another insurance company. Mr. Fried replied that Risk Management has brought forward a declaratory judgement suit saying that they were not liable on their policy to defend the city or liable for any results that might come from an action against the city on a claim for a taking of property. Mr. Fried advised that the court declared that the Risk Management was responsible and they are now defending that taking claim with their own attorney. Mr. Fried reported the second part of this case is where a claim was made against the city for wrongful acts of the city’s administration. Mr. Fried stated they advised their carrier that it was their opinion under the Michigan Municipal policy that they were responsible for that claim and therefore, they should defend the city on that claim. Mr. Fried discussed the matter with Mr. Klaver and Mr. Fried’s office continued to defend the city on that claim, and they billed Risk Management for their services in that regard. Risk Management had not paid them and Mr. Fried advised they sat down with Mr. Klaver once again because someone has to pay them. Mr. Fried suggested that they bring action against the Michigan Municipal League with a declaratory judgement action to determine whether they should defend the city and be responsible for any liability that may arise. They then met with the claim adjustor, who in turn advised they will get back with them. Mr. Fried reported they waited four months without any word. They then wrote to the Michigan Municipal League stating they cannot wait any longer and his office prepared a complaint that if they did not resolve this question, they would file the complaint against them. Mr. Fried received a letter within the last couple of days asking them not to institute this action and that they would like to discuss the matter further.

Councilman Schmid asked if the Michigan Municipal League will pick up some of the cost. Mr. Fried believes they should pick up most of the cost.

Councilman Schmid asked whether Risk Management appealed the original declaratory action. Mr. Fried recalled that the city changed carriers in 1993 and therefore, they are responsible for all damages prior to 1993.

Councilman DeRoche asked if Risk Management has brought forward declatory action against the city. Mr. Fried replied when they brought action against the city and the plaintiff in the other case; the court ruled against them.

Councilman DeRoche asked if they have defended anything under reservation rights for either matter. Mr. Fried replied they have made no reservation right and they have made no declaration either way. Mr. Fried added the city will either file action to have the court determine whether there is responsibility or they will accept responsibility.

CM-97-11-367: Moved by Schmid, Seconded by DeRoche, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY: To adopt Amendment 98-08 - 1996-1997 Rollover Items in the amount of $609,991

Nays: None

COMMITTEE REPORTS - None

MAYOR AND COUNCIL ISSUES

1. Potential OST Zoning of land east of M-5 north of I-96 Expressways - Mayor McLallen

Mayor McLallen included this memo in hopes of stimulating a discussion about rezonings and changes in the master plan in the area east of M-5, north of I-96. The Mayor explained diversification of the tax base has been a goal in the last political election and one way to achieve this goal was the enactment of OST Zoning. She added although the community and planning process have developed the zoning, they have yet to include it in the master plan to make it usable.

Mayor McLallen asked Council to request that the Planning Commission do this within the next sixty days and that they accomplish this in two phases. She explained one phase would be in the area east of M-5 and north of I-96 by comparing OST Zoning with the existing zoning. The second phase would explore the appropriate areas for OST in the western portion or along the Grand River corridor and should be back before Council in the spring. Mayor McLallen’s hope is to get zoning that reflects the current development community so they can capture some of the positive economic development and permit the appropriate studies to move forward.

Councilman Schmid has provided a history of the M-5 area. He reported M-5 was first discussed and approved in 1988-89 and most Council members suggested that they leave the land as residential zoning. Councilman Schmid recalled they did not propose M-5 as a super highway and that it was much like Telegraph Road. Councilman Schmid believes the land can develop effectively as residential and sees no reason why they should rezone it. Councilman Schmid is absolutely opposed to any rezoning in this area.

Councilwoman Lorenzo will reserve judgement in terms of zoning until they have explored all the information and it comes back before Council; she believes they are still in the exploration mode. Councilwoman Lorenzo would support a resolution requesting the Planning Department and consultants under their retainers to make every effort to assist the Master Plan and Zoning Committee and Planning Commission in completing their review of potential OST Districts in a timely fashion. Councilwoman Lorenzo added they should recognize that Council is anxious to receive their recommendation and while also recognizing that the Master Plan and Zoning Committee have been unable to proceed further due to circumstances beyond their control.

Councilwoman Lorenzo believes a sixty day time limit is unrealistic given they are headed toward the Christmas season. She believes the Planning Commission is as anxious as Council, but unfortunately the Master Plan and Zoning Committee met on April 15 and did not meet again on this issue until August 13. She explained Mr. Capote indicated in a memo to Mr. Wahl that there were several meetings with the city’s attorney, staff and consultants regarding the legal implications of city initiated rezoning in those areas and given the myriad of issues, the committee did not meet again until August 13. Therefore, it was not the fault of the committee and she does not want to give the impression that Council did not think they were doing their work in a timely fashion or that they are going to rush them at this point.

Councilman Kramer agrees with the spirit as written and suggested they add discussion regarding this matter to the agenda in their joint meeting with the Planning Commission to develop a work plan.

2. Request to Schedule a Joint Meeting between the City Council and the Planning Commission for Saturday, December 13, 1997 at 8:00 to 10:00 A.M. - the purpose of the meeting would be for discussion and tour of potential OST Zoning District Uses

Mayor McLallen advised she has met with the Planning Commission’s Chair regarding this issue and advised that the members of the Planning Commission are available on the morning of December 13 for a joint meeting and asked if Council would be willing to discuss this matter further with them at that time in addition to touring the city.

Councilman DeRoche agrees it is appropriate, but noted he will be out of town that day.

MANAGER’S REPORTS

1. Walden Woods I Engineering Report on Roads - Anthony Nowicki

Joe Kapelczak of JCK & Associates advised there is a memo from Mr. Nowicki to Mr. Kriewall regarding what his office has looked at over the last several years and what they feel should be done. Mr. Kapelczak advised they feel prior to the acceptance of the streets in Walden Woods that $29,110 be placed with the City of Novi for next year’s concrete replacement program in which they will then replace approximately 710 square yards of concrete. He further advised they will deposit another $12,669 into the road fund for concrete that may need replacement prior to its twenty year life. Mr. Kapelczak added Haim Schlick and other technical members of his office concur with this plan as they reviewed this last year. Mr. Kapelczak advised the developer is ready to pay the funds and added he is present tonight to answer any questions. Further, a member of the Walden Woods Homeowner’s Association is present who would also like to see these funds placed within the city’s hands and the city take this over in next year’s concrete replacement program so they know it will be done.

Councilman Schmid asked what does 710 square yards of concrete equate to? Mr. Kapelczak reported the streets are 28 feet back to back and recalled that it was approximately 210 lineal feet. He stated he and Mr. Schlick measured the spalled areas, and that the spalled area in front of Mr. Utley’s house will come out next year.

Councilman Schmid asked if it equates to 210 feet. Mr. Kapelczak understands that it equates to three yards per running foot and will cover the spalled areas. Mr. Kapelczak restated they had several people (including the Concrete Institute) look at these roads and they have no explanation as to why that area went bad. Further, it was one of the top quality pavers who paved that area. Mr. Kapelczak said Mr. Utley is present if Council would like to know what the homeowner’s would like to see done and he believes he represents the majority of them.

Scott Pitcher, Director of the Walden Woods Homeowners Association’s Advisory Committee advised that the homeowner’s association was in its formative stages for four years primarily because of the street issue. Mr. Pitcher reported they recently conducted a survey among the homeowners to determine what items needed to be completed prior to turning over the subdivision. Mr. Pitcher advised it was nearly unanimous within the subdivision that the street issue was a priority and that they support the negotiated settlement between they city’s management and the developer in hopes of resolving that issue. Mr. Pitcher added they are not trying to take sides and frankly, they do not have the expertise to determine how many yards of concrete they require. However, he stated that the streets continue to deteriorate, but the settlement on the table is acceptable to them as a homeowner’s association and they request that the city and developer move forward.

Mayor McLallen understands that the settlement is acceptable to both the developer and to the homeowner’s association. Mr. Cousineau stated as the developer, he is satisfied.

Mayor McLallen asked what is the next step? Mr. Kapelczak believes the next step is that the developer will deposit the money with the city and once the paperwork currently being reviewed by Mr. Fried is complete, the subdivision will come before Council for acceptance of utilities.

Mayor McLallen noted that Mr. Utley raised a new issue this evening and added that Mr. Nowicki’s letter did allude that there were other issues within the subdivision. Mr. Kapelczak agreed. The Mayor explained Mr. Utley reported there were problems with the trees and wondered if they are a separate issue. She then asked whether they were a part of the acceptance of the subdivision. Mr. Kapelczak is uncertain and believes the issue is between the DEQ and the city’s wetland consultants. He explained the DEQ sometimes support trees dying because they believe it sometimes helps the habitat. However, he understands there is also another side to that issue and noted he does not become involved in those kinds of issues.

Mayor McLallen wants to be clear that they are establishing an acceptance of roads and that these other issues are unrelated to the issues they have been working toward settling. Mr. Kapelczak stated the Mayor is correct.

Councilwoman Mutch asked if it is their opinion if the city accepts the streets that they will have identified the areas most likely to continue to be a problem if they did not take care of them. In other words, she asked if they are sure other areas will not begin to deteriorate. Mr. Kapelczak replied they have concluded that there should be no further spalling. He advised they looked at the streets in 1996 and in 1997, and no new deterioration surfaced.

Councilwoman Lorenzo agreed with Councilwoman Mutch’s comments and added that she will be concerned whether the cost of repairs will exceed the bond. Mr. Kapelczak advised according to their calculations they have $41.00 per square yard for replacement and he is confident they have covered the cost for the repairs.

Mayor McLallen asked whether there are any further reports from the Manager’s office.

Mr. Kriewall reported that the relocation of the Detroit Water Board transmission main is underway and as a result, there was a reduction in pressure over the weekend. However, it was monitored by the water department’s personnel and Mr. Kriewall advised there were only a few complaints this morning from the north end, but no one went without water. Mr. Kriewall noted this will take place over three weekends and there will be continuing notices on cable.

Mr. Klaver reported the Senior Citizen’s Housing Implementation Committee solicited requests for qualifications from a large group of architects. They have now come up with six semifinalists that they will interview on December 15 and 16. Mr. Klaver advised they hope to have a recommendation for the Building Authority for final selection shortly.

Mr. Klaver added they met with approximately thirty homeowner’s in Meadowbrook Glens on November 14 who shared some of their concerns about the project. Overall, Mr. Klaver advised there was a favorable reaction and he believes they are looking forward to working with the city on this project.

ATTORNEY’S REPORTS - None

1. Letter from HAVEN to City of Novi, Re: Thank you for grant contribution

2. Letter from Time Warner Cable to City Manager Kriewall, Re: Price Adjustments

3. Letter from Fried, Watson & Bugbee to City Clerk Bartholomew, Re: Delta, City-School Agreements

4. Press Release from Community EMS, Re: Community EMS Receipt of a National Honor

5. Memorandum from Chief Shaeffer to Edward Kriewall, Re: Police Department Generator Purchase

6. Resolution from Charter Township of Springfield, Re: County Funded Road Improvements

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business before City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 12:30 a.m.

Mayor City Clerk

Transcribed by Barbara Holmes