Mayor Clark called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE GIRL SCOUT TROOP #3341

ROLL CALL: Mayor Clark, Mayor ProTem Lorenzo, Council Members Bononi-absent/excused, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche and Kramer

Member Kramer added the Façade Ordinance to Mayor and Council Issues as #3.

Member DeRoche added discussion regarding a communication on the sidewalks on the overpass of Wixom Road as #4.

Mr. Fisher, City Attorney, requested Item 20 under Matters for Council Action – Part 2

be deleted, as it was not ready to present.

Mr. Klaver presented the updated, reallocated CDBG proposed use recommendations. At the first public hearing there was consensus towards focusing a little more on neighborhood infrastructure improvements. The two categories were the administration of the program itself, which was a $7,000 item, and it was suggested the dollars could be maximized by absorbing that and they had done so. Then there were the items for the 13-Mile Fire Station that included an air compressor, inflatable boat and a motor for the boat. Mr. Klaver said this would be replacement equipment to upgrade the current equipment. It was suggested it might be more appropriate to allocate those resources from the General Fund. Chief Lenaghan said it would not cause any undue hardships to wait and reallocate those proposals out of the upcoming budget process.

Then there was the need for a sidewalk along the west side of Old Novi Road from where it branched off Novi Road onto Old Novi Road and up to 13 Mile Road. This was also a recommendation this evening.

Thirdly, there was support for increasing funding for the H.A.V.E.N. program and the entire category of those public services could only be 50% of the total allocation. After minor adjustments of other categories it had been realigned and they were proposing a $10,000 donation to the H.A.V.E.N. program.

Jim Korte, Shawood Lake, asked that the budget for the 13 Mile Road bike path be approved.

Sarah Gray, 133 Maudlin, was thrilled to see the revised budget and money given to H.A.V.E.N. Minor home repairs was down to $5,000 but this did not address all the funds held in abeyance from previous years. She really hoped a budget item would be done soon for the air compressor at Fire Station #2 because it was 19 years old.

Mr. Helwig commented, regarding the CDBG Funds public hearing, there was also in the material Mr. Klaver was referencing a memo from Mr. Nowicki indicating the overall cost of the sidewalk was estimated at $162,500. The hope would be that bidding with other projects would bring the cost down but the proposed funding out of HCD Funds is approaching a third of what was needed. They would bring forward, if Council concurred at next weeks meeting, their authorization to apply for a Michigan Transportation Enhancement Program Grant which would appear on the December 4^th agenda. It would require a minimum share of 20% and presumably we could be successful there in competing for funds to help bridge the gap. The amount of $48,913 would not fully fund the bike path.

3. ATTORNEY - None

Paul Sherbeck, Simmons Orchard Subdivision, was opposed to adopting resolutions scheduling public hearings on the establishment of an Industrial Development District and Industrial Facilities Exemption certificate for the Novi Expo Center. Soon taxpayers of Novi might be asked to fund up to $125 million for Novi Schools and pending litigation continues to loom over us. Once the first abatement was issued it would be easier to grant property tax breaks to other businesses that would be lining up for a handout. Businesses are always talking about getting government off their backs but if that’s what they want they had to get their hands out of the taxpayers pockets.

There is a mountain of evidence that targeted tax breaks and other subsidies do not work and might be harmful to economic activity. He asked when the citizens would hear proposals of substance from their elected officials? Why not work to reduce the size and scope of government and to eliminate corporate and capital gains taxes? Should politically powerful businesses be given special treatment and should businesses that contribute thousands of dollars to local and state politicians be given subsidies? Council actions would determine the answers to these questions.

Jim Korte, Shawood Lake, thought Agenda Item #4 was a joke. Also, regarding S.A.D. #149 and #151, Eubank, LeMay, Maudlin and Austin, he could not understand why supplemental additions or subtractions had to be done on points 5 and 6. The main was put in and point 7 was connected. If points 5 and 6 weren’t right would the water main be torn out with no charge? Austin had not been billed yet but they have had water for one year. The rest of Shawood/Walled Lake Heights had been billed on their taxes and the bids were not in on what the cost would actually be. How can people be charged for a water main they don’t have and why hasn’t Austin been billed. He still didn’t know what the 47^th tap was? He asked for a copy of the new assessor’s roll. He noted there were homes getting free water because they were not on the assessor’s roll. He asked how property without a water tap could get a water meter and why aren’t they being charged the S.A.D. He asked that these matters be corrected.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Helwig to have answers for Mr. Korte by the next meeting. TRACK

Andrew Mutch addressed Items #21-22, regarding the Novi Expo Center proposed tax abatement. On May 15^th of this year Mayor Clark indicated there would be no give aways or freebies and he trusted that. However, he was concerned that the time line proposed by the resolutions on the agenda did not provide enough time for the public to study the benefits and drawbacks of the proposal. He questioned how well the community understood the tax abatement process. Novi had a very defined City policy but when reviewing the State law found it was clear that local control oftentimes was not controlling and could be overridden at the State level. Also, the State would allow a development to come back and request future tax abatement as long as it did not exceed 12 years. The State Treasurer has the authority to waive additional school taxes beyond what the abatement already addressed. There are a lot of issues that the City would not have any control over with this tax abatement policy. He felt Council needed to address the significant impact on the school taxes. Tax abatement legislation allowed half of the 18 local operating mills to be waived/abated and the debt service millage would also be cut in half. Also, with the State Treasurer’s authorization all the State education tax could be waived and that would have a significant impact on the local schools. The Novi School District depends on local operating taxes for a significant amount of its operating budget. This proposal could literally run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost school operating funds. The school district already faced shortfalls and had mentioned potential future funding needs.

Sarah Gray spoke regarding #2, S.A.D. 149, which was her S.A.D. She questioned why she was potentially subsidizing the S.A.D. for the 31^st lot in her subdivision. She asked for an answer before the meeting of the 18^th. Regarding Item #5, vacation of 13 Mile Road, the answers brought forward at the last meeting about the adequacy of the right-of-way as far as 13 Mile was quite appropriate. She advised caution if vacating Lot 8. The sidewalk safety path on the west side of Novi Road had been estimated at $162,500 and she felt a bike path on one side and a safety path on the other was not needed. She thought asphalt might be better even though a variance would be needed.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo removed Item D for clarification.

A. Approve Minutes of:

1. November 13, 2000, Regular Meeting
2. November 17, 2000, Special Meeting
3. November 18, 2000, Special Meeting

B. Approval of Conservation and Preservation Easement from Brian Walker,

Sidwell Nos: 50-22-29-326-026 and 027, property located on Nine Mile

3. Request for approval of Resolution changing MERS benefits for COAM group

5. Approval of Resolution authorizing Treasury filing on the 2001 Road Bond Issue in the amount of $10,000,000
6. Approval to purchase One (1) Ford Crown Victoria for the Fire Department through the Oakland County Joint Purchasing Program from Shaheen Ford Mercury in the amount of $20,678
7. Approval of claims and accounts: Warrant No. 585

Mr. Helwig noted that Finance Director Ms. Smith-Roy had prepared this item, which chronicled

the Budget line items that were a part of the August 28^th S.A.D. 155 Bond sale.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo noted she would be consistent with her previous actions on this item and would vote against it and anything pertaining to it. Her concern was this pledged the full faith and City credit and if the project was not successful she was concerned the City would be paying for it.

2. Approval of Supplemental Resolutions 5 & 6 for SAD #149-Eubank Street Water Main setting a public hearing for December 18, 2000

CM-00-11-368 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve Supplemental Resolutions 5 & 6 for S.A.D. #149 – Eubank

Street Water Main setting a public hearing for December 18, 2000.

DISCUSSION

Member Kramer asked that someone review the process with Council.

Mr. Fisher said even though the district was not changing, there had been a lot split within the district so the roll was being modified.

Member Kramer requested that the questions raised this evening be answered in conjunction with the public hearing. Mayor Clark stated Mr. Helwig would take care of that by the next meeting.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo requested Ms. Gray’s questions be answered in full by the next meeting. TRACK ------

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-368 Yeas: Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark,

Lorenzo

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

3. Approval of Supplemental Resolutions 5 & 6 for SAD #151, Austin Street Water Main, setting a public hearing for December 18, 2000

CM-00-11-369 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve Supplemental Resolutions 5 & 6 for S.A.D. #151, Austin

Street Water Main, setting a public hearing for December 18, 2000.

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo requested the questions raised by Mr. Korte be addressed fully by the next meeting. TRACK =======

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-369 Yeas: Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark, Lorenzo,

Crawford

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

4. Request by Dorothy Nail to remove woodland designation from lots 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 & 159 in Shawood Walled Lake Heights Subdivision

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo noted Ms. Lemke had recommended denial of this request. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo felt it would compromise the intent and integrity of the Ordinance and the ordinance contained provisions for this type of request.

Member Kramer and Mayor Clark concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo and thought the trees were an enhancement to the property value.

Member DeRoche was confident supporting the motion because the people buying the property would have reasonable people hearing their individual cases.

Mr. Fisher said the action denying the permit would not result in unbuildable sites.

5. Adoption of revised Resolution Vacating Thirteen Mile Road right-of-way adjacent to Lots 3, 4, 5,6,7 and 8 of Garvey’s Acres Subdivision (5 votes necessary)

CM-00-11-371 Moved by Crawford, seconded by Csordas; MOTION FAILED:

To adopt the revised Resolution Vacating Thirteen Mile Road

Right-of-way adjacent to Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Garvey’ Acres

Subdivision.

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked why payment was not being requested for the property. The City purchased it and it should not be donated to adjacent property owners. She would not support the motion to vacate.

Member Kramer supported the motion.

Mr. Arroyo said the issue was whether there would be a need for additional R.O.W. on Haggerty Road. The current official line was 120 feet, however the City’s thoroughfare plan specified a four-lane boulevard in this location. It would be the type of boulevard that had a narrower median and could generally fit within 120 feet. There are areas, such as turn around areas, where additional R.O.W. might be needed. The Oakland County Road Commission felt an additional 15 feet to provide for a half R.O.W. of 75 foot would provide for additional flexibility. The additional 15 feet and an easement situation would give the flexibility needed.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked what the City paid for the property and how much the vacation would be worth if buying it back today or what someone else would pay for it. Mr. Nowicki did not know how much was paid and said the City did not pay for the property on the south side of Thirteen Mile Road. The City eventually bought the property on the north side of Thirteen Mile many years ago to relocate the roadway to the north. It was probably done in the 80’s. The idea now was to return the property to the tax roll for some usable purpose. She had a problem with donating the property. The property could be offered to the adjoining property for a fair and reasonable price and the money could be put towards needed road improvements.

Member Crawford said the City did not purchase the property and if returned to the tax rolls the City would benefit. He did not recall property being sold on Erma Street to the people we vacated the properties for. He thought it should be vacated. He asked Mr. Arroyo if the additional 15 feet was incorporated in what was being done? Mr. Arroyo said it was and there would be no change needed to the resolution. The easement could be retained without making a modification. Mr. Nowicki said the Resolution before Council was a revised resolution to address what Mr. Arroyo said.

Mr. Kramer asked if the disposition of City property was a matter of policy, ordinance or any other legal definition? Mr. Fisher said State Law made provision as part of the Land Division Act for vacating of property used for road purposes. It would be a policy question.

Member DeRoche said with this particular vacation, there are already lots and zoning in place for this to be developed.

Gary Jonna was the owner of Lots 4, 5, and soon to be lot 3. He originated the request and said when the road shifted it created the surplus R.O.W. There are other utilities in there and reservations for storm drainage and utilities. It is not a strip of marketable land and would simply allow the property to be next to the OST development proposed for that area. He felt approval of this matter was a win/win situation. He thought not to do this would be to serve no practical purpose.

Member DeRoche said it appeared to him there would be value added to Mr. Jonna’s project. Mr. Jonna said in this case, it would yield a value to the City in terms of a larger development and a higher S.E.V. Member DeRoche agreed and thought it also brought value to Mr. Jonna’s property and perhaps these cases should be looked at on their own merits when before Council.

Member Kramer thought they should get an estimate of the value of the property before making a decision. He wanted additional information and time to think about what was appropriate.

CM-00-11- Moved by Lorenzo,

To postpone and authorize administration to investigate a

potential market for this property.

Mayor Clark said assuming Mr. Jonna didn’t have this vacated strip of property the project would still be built but it would affect the set backs. He asked Mr. Jonna if that was correct? Mr. Jonna said it would not stop the project but they were up against deadlines in planning the site. It was planned with and without the vacation and he was told it would be delayed two weeks.

Mayor Clark said if a policy was started and the abutting property owner would have the opportunity to buy the property but said no thanks we would be left with what we have right now. It would be a piece of property that was not on the tax roll, generated no income to the City but did have the ever-present possibility of liability exposure. It would be a no win situation for the City. He asked Council to bear that in mind.

CM-00-11- Motion Died for lack of support

Member Csordas said it seemed like the rules are being changed after the game has finished. He asked Mr. Fisher what precedent this would set? He concurred with Member Crawford and Mayor Clark and thought it was not a prudent decision.

Mr. Fisher noted there would be limited precedent to the extent that facts in another situation would be the same. The facts would be the closest with regard to other properties along the same strip.

Member Csordas thought the question was whether it was fair or not and there had been a long-term policy not to do this. What If Council decided to get some revenue for the property and the petitioner said he needed the property but thought it should be settled in court. Council had been talking for a year now about risk management and protecting the City from future situations. He felt this was a win/win situation and a very reasonable request. He would support the motion as it stood leaving the 15 feet for the future R.O.W.

Member DeRoche asked which lots Mr. Jonna was working on? He responded 4 and 5 and 3 would be purchased shortly. He asked if he planned on accessing the lots from Thirteen Mile Road. Mr. Jonna said yes. Member DeRoche said that mitigated some of the concern he had. He initially thought it should be vacated all at once but believed there should be a nominal amount for this particular one knowing the access was coming from Thirteen Mile and there would be a separation between the two and thought Council should put something in place. The reason he did not second the motion to postpone was he disagreed with the reasons to postpone and didn’t think it was necessary to drag the property owner through the process of putting a new policy in place. This was a case where administration should work with the property owner and find out what it would be worth to him. Then bring that answer back to Council.

CM-00-11-372 Moved by DeRoche, seconded by Lorenzo; MOTION FAILED:

To postpone this consideration and authorize the administration

to investigate a potential market.

DISCUSSION

Member Crawford would not support the motion. He concurred with Mayor Clark about potential liability, with the petitioner’s comments that this would return to the tax roll and Member Csordas’ comments about changing the rules in the middle of the game. Never once in Member Crawford’s 15 years had the issue of compensation for the vacation of a piece of property been brought up. He thought to change the philosophy was totally inappropriate.

Member Kramer said he did not think it was appropriate to change the rules now but did want to consider whether the policy needed adjusting. He would not support the motion to postpone.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said this was clearly a business decision Council was making and they needed to do what was in the best interest of our business. It would not be hard for the petitioner to make this decision as he is in business to make money and Council should be too, for the citizens of Novi. She felt money should be made on this.

Member Crawford asked fellow Council Members where their concern was on doing the proper business decision when they vacated Erma and other streets in the north end and throughout the City.

Mayor Clark noted he had no problem with the City making money but he was mindful of the fact Council had to live with the realities they were faced with. He felt no one would buy this small strip of property and the petitioner said he could do without it. If the property was attached to a taxpayer, went on the rolls and increased the S.E.V. it would increase the taxes. He could not think of a better way to manage risk then to get rid of a piece of property that could not be marketed to anyone else, get rid of the liability and increase the income.

Member Csordas concurred with Mayor Clark.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-372 Yeas: Lorenzo, DeRoche

Nays: Kramer, Clark, Crawford, Csordas

Absent: Bononi

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-371 Yeas: Clark, Crawford, Csordas, Kramer

Nays: Lorenzo, DeRoche

Absent: Bononi

CM-00-11-373 Moved by DeRoche, seconded by Lorenzo; MOTION FAILED:

To direct administration to find out if there was a nominal offer

the property owner would offer the City in exchange for the vacation of the property.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-373 Yeas: Lorenzo, DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: Crawford, Csordas, Clark

Absent: Bononi

(5 votes were required for majority on these motions)

6. Request from N & Y Properties and Triangle Development Company for approval

on the proposed stipulated amendment to the Consent Judgment for property

located at the northwest corner of Meadowbrook Road and Grand River – Gateway

Village Project

Matt Quinn, representing N & Y Properties, updated Council on the changes and additions to the proposal being presented. Mr. Quinn said upon its adoption this would be entered with the courts and then the parties would move to final site plan items which would be handled administratively with the wetland people and Mr. Arroyo.

Member Kramer asked Mr. Quinn to clarify Item U on page 5. Mr. Quinn said it should have read " tailors, video rental stores". They are two separate things. Item K should read "Sporting Goods Stores".

CM-00-11-374 Moved by DeRoche, seconded by Csordas; CARRIED

UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the request from N & Y Properties

and Triangle Development Company for approval on the proposed

stipulated amendment to the Consent Judgment for property located

at the northwest corner of Meadowbrook Road and Grand River – Gateway Village Project.

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo questioned Item E, Specialty Food Stores, because it seemed predatory to her and she thought it had been addressed in terms of gourmet markets, etc.

Mr. Quinn said it was not predatory. It would not be a restaurant but a smaller use such as a delicatessen, Mr. Pita, Tubby’s, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked that Mr. Quinn’s definition of the particular uses be included in the document. Mr. Fisher said that would be fine.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-374 Yeas: Lorenzo, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche,

Kramer, Clark

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

7. Request from Mamola Associates Architects for a variance from the Design and Construction Standards to terminate the sidewalk along the easterly 340 ft portion of Eleven Mile Road and Bishop Creek

Mr. Mamola was requesting this portion of the bike path not be constructed. He said the City would be making improvements along that side of Eleven Mile Road and if the sidewalk were put in the City would have to pay $50,000 to $60,000 to have the newly constructed sidewalk removed for improvements. Mr. Mamola was proposing that his client would set aside money, amount agreed upon by the City, and the money would be accessible by the City when the culvert and lane improvements were done. They would meet with administration to determine what the fair value would be.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if that would be fair value at what it would cost to construct the sidewalk whenever it would be constructed or at today’s prices?

Mr. Mamola said he was not sure how the financial arrangements would work but assumed if money was set aside there would be money made on that money, which would help the City with any inflation factor on the cost. Mr. Mamola said they would pay the full cost of construction, at the time of construction, assuming it was in the next 2 or 3 years and not an extended period of time.

To approve Mamola Associates Architects request for a variance from

Member Kramer proposed that the motion be worded "to postpone the sidewalk and that financial assets be set aside for future construction at an appropriate time". Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo accepted the reworded motion.

Clark, Lorenzo

Nays: None

Jim Korte, Shawood Lake, said two temporary stop signs were put up on East Lake when the traffic was unbearable. One sign was removed immediately and now that the traffic is much better the second sign needed to be removed.

He discussed the Sharf’s home and said there was no way to remove the front stoops that are in the City R.O.W. from the man’s house. Mr. Sharf would like to make some improvements and Mr. Korte thought Council was duty bound to the lease agreement with regard to their R.O.W. Mr. Korte asked that Mr. Sharf be allowed to proceed with improvement and upkeep.

Carol Crawford, Beck Road, thanked Council for re-evaluating the block grant.

8. Approval of Resolution to designate CDBG funds 2001

CM-00-11-376 Moved by Crawford, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED

UNANIMOUSLY: To approve the Resolution to designate

CDBG funds 2001.

DISCUSSION

Member Kramer was pleased with the revised definition and thanked administration and the Community Development Block Grant Committee for looking at this program again. The original proposal included money for Novi Youth Assistance and he asked if the City budget had an element in it for Youth Assistance.

Mr. Klaver said the City support of the Novi Youth Assistance was predominately in sharing the clerical position between the school district and the City. The Resolution included waivers and money from prior years for Youth Assistance had been set aside and would be allocated to help pay for some of the expense.

Member Kramer thought reorienting the whole program was appropriate and he strongly supported it.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo suggested taking the employees salary out of that and absorbing it into the General Fund budget. Also, rather then have Chief Lenaghan wait until this budget session for his apparatus she would rather see a budget amendment as quickly as possible. She asked that this be done now and that the resolution be postponed.

Mr. Helwig said the not quite so firm deadline for having this program application to the County was December 1^st and they wanted to meet that deadline. He asked if she wanted the $9,000 item absorbed into the General Fund and allocated to help infrastructure improvements. She said she did and Mr. Helwig did not see why it could not be done by Council.

Mr. Helwig stated he would support that and it was Council’s prerogative to make that adjustment tonight instead of postponing it since the County would like to see this come in on time.

Member Crawford, maker of the motion, would not agree.

CM-00-11-377 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by DeRoche; MOTION FAILED:

Amendment To amend the original motion so that the $9,000 could be allocated to sidewalks.

DISCUSSION

Member DeRoche said Member Crawford was a very large supporter for senior citizens in this community and had been for years. Member DeRoche supported this because he did not want to put any of that money in jeopardy. To qualify for the CDBG there are income and devaluing restrictions that are not happening in Novi anymore. So this was actually a very proactive step so we don’t get into a problem, in the future, saying we need $9,000 more for the seniors. He would rather do it now to make sure that funding is in place and with a more secure source of funding.

Member Crawford noted his displeasure with the amendment did not have anything to do with supporting senior citizens; it is the process we have gone through. We have a committee that has studied this for several months and no one suggested the senior citizen manager be removed from that process. It came to Council a few weeks ago and that was not one of the concerns expressed. If it was that much of a concern it should have been expressed long ago and not now when it was before Council in a third final form.

Mayor Clark said the $9,000 proposed was to benefit the seniors in the community, many of them on limited income. Is that correct? Member DeRoche said absolutely. Council did not see his input because he did not attend the last CDBG meeting when what they sent to Council was discussed and changed. He also did not attend the meeting when this was discussed two or three weeks ago. He apologized for missing this. He felt a lot of the projects had a City wide benefit but proportionately in this area there might be an increased benefit and that was why it was an appropriate use of these funds as in previous years. Member DeRoche did not think the block grant would be available as a perpetual source of income to the community and so he looked at it as a good move.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-377 Yeas: Kramer, Lorenzo, DeRoche

Amendment Nays: Csordas, Clark, Crawford

Absent: Bononi

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-376 Yeas: Kramer, Clark, Lorenzo, Crawford, Csordas,

DeRoche

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

9. Approval of Resolution to set additional public hearing for vacation of Erma St. Walkway for 12-4-2000

11. Request to approve Ordinance No. 2000-101.07 granting a franchise for use of city

rights-of-way for the operations of a cable television system to Time Warner 1^st

Reading

CM-00-11-380 Moved by Crawford, seconded by Csordas; MOTION CARRIED:

To approve Ordinance No. 2000-101-07 granting a franchise for use of

City rights-of-way for the operations of a cable television system to

Time Warner – 1^st Reading

 

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo noted she would not support this motion because she did not support 40% of the franchise fee going to S.W.O.C.C. without accountability. She would not support that P.E.G.’s contribution was computed on gross revenues without imputation of the franchise fee, which allowed the franchisee to pass that 1% onto subscribers of Novi. Also, there were no agreements or timelines for cable modem, etc. in the contract.

Member Crawford responded there was accountability for the budget of S.W.O.C.C. and the process. He asked Mr. Klaver to respond to this and explain the process of the budget. Mr. Klaver said Ms. Collens submitted the budget and there was a review body of the three City Manager representatives that went through the budget and asked questions, reviewed and evaluated proposals and etc. Then the entire budget was submitted to the commission for their action. Then that information, videos etc. was provided to Council.

Member Crawford said then the 5% franchise fee is accounted for and reviewed by the City Managers. The S.W.O.C.C. Board was made up of elected officials from Farmington, Farmington Hills and Novi and a City Manager from each community. It is a very responsible board, a responsible Executive Director in Ms. Collens and the monies are accounted for and allocated responsibly.

 

Mr. McCann said they had not stated at any time that it would be a direct pass through. All they had asked for in the agreement was to reserve their rights under the law. As far as Internet access and digital cable service he reported those services would be available to the City of Novi not later than the end of the first quarter of the year 2001.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked why that was not in the contract and Mr. McCann said it was not typically put in a contract. Member Crawford said it was not negotiated in the contract but there was a public statement on record and it would be in the minutes that it would be available at the end of the first quarter 2001.

Member DeRoche said it was frustrating when people come out and say they are going to vote against something because they are not empowered to rewrite the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996. We are not empowered to do some of the things people want us to do as City Council people so we have to weigh the options before us.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-380 Yeas: Crawford, Csordas, De Roche, Kramer, Clark

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi

12. Approval to solicit engineering, inspection, and contract administration proposals for the 2001 Neighborhood Roadway and Major Street Rehabilitation Program and authorization for the Attorneys to prepare an Engineering Agreement

CM-00-11-381 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED

UNANIMOUSLY: To grant approval to solicit engineering,

inspection, and contract administration proposals for the 2001

Neighborhood Roadway and Major Street Rehabilitation

Program and authorization for the Attorneys to prepare an

Engineering Agreement.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-381 Yeas: Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark , Lorenzo,

Crawford

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

13. Adoption of Ordinance No. 2000-81.19, an ordinance to delete the traffic stop sign

Member Kramer thought "subject to compliance to the consultants recommendations" should be added. Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo stated she would accept the addition to her motion.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Fisher if he had looked at this? Mr. Fisher said yes and the action was meaningful. Member Crawford said the JCK letter of September 26^th had 6 comments they asked be complied with.

15. Approval of Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.06(E)(1) waiver pertaining to

overhead utility lines in the Park Place Subdivision contingent upon appropriate

tree replacements

CM-00-11-384 Moved by Csordas, seconded by Crawford; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.06(E)(1) waiver pertaining

to overhead utility lines in the Park Place Subdivision contingent upon

appropriate tree replacements and to include the comments of the

consultants.

DISCUSSION

Member Csordas wished to include the comments of the consultants.


Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if buried lines were more expensive. The ordinance did not differentiate between residential or service lines. All lines should be buried and why not bury this line.

Mr. Nowicki said this was a systems line and based on discussions with Detroit Edison this would be a span of approximately 140 feet and would be disruptive to the trees if buried. She asked if it was possible to bore under them? Mr. Nowicki said it was but there was still a risk of damaging the trees.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said the alternative to what is proposed would be to have them on Nine Mile along the road right-of-way. Mr. Nowicki said that was correct and the disruption would be to a current resident now as opposed to a future resident. She asked about the trees.

Ms. Lemke said along Nine Mile there are very large individual Oak and Maple trees. They could bore under the trees along Nine Mile but with considerable risk to the trees. Along the rear of the lot the trees are of lesser quality and part of regulated woodland. If there were overhead wires there would be no disturbance and they would span the trees.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if they were far enough away from the users backyard to reduce the liability? Mr. Nowicki said these are one-acre lots and it would be at the very rear of the lot line. She asked if this was typical to be in someone’s backyard? Mr. Nowicki said by our ordinance it was not typical and that was why the developer was present petitioning for a waiver of our ordinance. She asked about an easement. Mr. Nowicki did not think there was an easement yet but there probably would be for utilities.

Ms. Lemke said Edison would maintain their small corridor.

Member Crawford called the question.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-384 Yeas: Clark, Lorenzo, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche,

Kramer

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

 

16. Approval of Cost Participation Agreement with the Road Commission for Oakland

County for the Ten Mile at Taft Road traffic signal upgrades

CM-00-11-385 Moved by Lorenzo, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To approve the Cost Participation Agreement with the Road

Commission for Oakland County for the Ten-Mile at Taft Road traffic

signal upgrades

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-385 Yeas: Lorenzo, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche,

Kramer, Clark

Nays: None

Absent: Bononi

17. Acceptance of Option Agreement with Anthony & Adeline Tedesco for the Twelve

Mile and Other Roadway Improvements Project (SAD-155) and authorization to exercise the Agreement

CM-00-11-386 Moved by Kramer, seconded by DeRoche; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY:

To accept the Option Agreement with Anthony & Adeline Tedesco for

the Twelve Mile and Other Roadway Improvements Project (SAD-155)

and authorization to exercise the Agreement

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-386 Yeas: Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi

18. Adoption of Resolution and authorization to make an Offer to Purchase Real Estate

for the Twelve-Mile and Other Roadway Improvements Project: Middlebelt

Landing, LLC, (50-22-10-400-049) for $17,790 (SAD #155)

CM-00-11-387 Moved by Csordas, seconded by Kramer; MOTION CARRIED:

To Adopt Resolution and authorization to make an Offer to Purchase

Real Estate for the Twelve Mile and Other Roadway Improvements

Project: Middlebelt Landing, LLC, (50-22-10-400-049) for $17,790 (SAD

#155)

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if all of the offers to purchase real estate for the road right-of-way were being added onto the S.A.D. Mr. Fisher said they were. She asked if the offers were rejected and Council started condemnation proceedings would that also be added to the S.A.D.? Mr. Fisher said it would and to the extent that the agreement provided for a supplemental S.A.D. to provide for the costs.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-387 Yeas: Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer, Clark

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi, Crawford

 

19. Adoption of Resolution and authorization to make an Offer to Purchase Real Estate

for the Twelve-Mile and Other Roadway Improvements Project: Roland Gerhart

Trust, (50-22-10-400-054) for $65,080 (SAD #155)

CM-00-11-388 Moved by DeRoche, seconded by Csordas; MOTION CARRIED:

To adopt Resolution and authorization to make an Offer to Purchase

Real Estate for the Twelve Mile and Other Roadway Improvements

Project: Roland Gerhart Trust, (50-22-10-400-054) for $65,080 (SAD

(#155)

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-388 Yeas: DeRoche, Kramer, Clark, Crawford, Csordas

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi

20. Adoption of Resolution and authorization to make an Offer to Purchase Real Estate

for the Twelve-Mile and other Roadway Improvements Project: Oaks Corner, Inc.,

(50-22-15-100-063) for $223,010 (SAD #155)

REMOVED FROM AGENDA BY CITY ATTORNEY MR. FISHER

21. Adoption of Resolution scheduling a public hearing for December 4, 2000 on

establishment of Industrial Development District – Novi Expo Center

CM-00-11-389 Moved by Crawford, seconded by Csordas; MOTION CARRIED:

To adopt Resolution scheduling a public hearing for December 4, 2000

on establishment of Industrial Development District – Novi Expo

Center

DISCUSSION

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo thought this was being rushed into and was not in the best interest of the public. She asked what information would be available to the public before the meeting.

Mr. Fisher said they would have an application filed by the property owner, all of the State law that applied to this matter and Mr. Capote had a very large portfolio of information.

Mr. Helwig said that portfolio would be available to the public.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo did not appreciate the pushiness of the staff, the spoon feeding from staff and thought this was in very poor timing and would not support this issue. She asked if this was being done because it was Mr. Bowman?

Mr. Helwig commented he understood the spirit of Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo’s comments but did take extreme exception with the reference of spoon-feeding from staff. He hoped the hallmark of everyday he was with Novi was that when they received information it was shared with City Council. He knew on Friday this information was coming and his instructions to the staff were to get the information to the Council as soon as it was received. He said they had told any potential applicant, because this was what was setting up with Textron on the eve of their withdrawal, they have told everyone two meetings unless Council wanted to change the policy. The other instruction, because this did not have to be done tonight, was he wanted a formal action from Council tonight to set the public hearing for the 4^th. This did not have to be done tonight and did not have to be on the agenda. He wanted to do everything he could to eliminate any perceptions that procedures were being short cutted or the public was being shortchanged. Council could change the process as far as when an applicant submitted an application, a public hearing and then a decision. Those were the guidelines followed now.

Mayor Clark said Mr. Bowman would not be treated any differently than anyone else before Council for possible tax abatement. However, he would not be singled out for any special treatment either. Everything would be done open and above board, everyone would be treated equally, fairly and with dignity and respect on both sides of the issue. We are not acting in haste and had taken time developing a policy and these items were no different than any other item on the agenda. Items for public knowledge can be picked up on cable, at the library, on the City web site and at City Hall. He said when Textron walked away from the City even with an abatement in the early years it would have been an additional $700,000 a year in the coffers of this City to help pay its obligations. Lets keep that in mind as we proceed forward with this. It doesn’t guarantee anybody anything but we should remember it and bear it in mind.

Member DeRoche stated he did not appreciate the earlier discussion and felt it was relatively underhanded and thought the City Manager had shown an extraordinary amount of diplomacy, strength and leadership by giving the response that he gave.

He voted against this tax abatement policy and still did not like it for a number of reasons. We are here to discuss scheduling a public hearing in accordance to the policy the Council adopted. He thought anybody that wanted Council to consider tax abatement, even though his predisposition was against them, they should be allowed to have the time to speak. It was incredibly irresponsible to say Council should not allow somebody to come down here when they have a project and they are talking about literally hundreds of million of dollars in revenues and tax multipliers to the City. Why wouldn’t we want them to be here and why would anyone vote against having them come down whenever they can. This is a public process, December 4^th is a Monday and he wanted to hear from the people. He was supportive to the public process because they should hear from them. He was unwilling and unprepared to vote against scheduling a public hearing.

Member Csordas concurred with Member DeRoche and said he did not share in the opinion of the previous speaker at all or that there was any force feeding to City Council on this issue or any other issue. He told Mr. Helwig that he and the majority of Council appreciated the breath of fresh air he had brought, the air of professionalism and the support that his fine staff had done in support of City Council, Planning Commission and all the other boards and commissions. He apologized for the statement and didn’t think anyone else on Council felt that way.

Member Kramer supported the motion because it was timely and responsive to do so. He felt to delay the public hearing would be much more of a disservice to the public as it was to close to Christmas. He supported the public hearing on the 4^th.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-389 Yeas: Kramer, Clark, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi

22. Adoption of Resolution scheduling a public hearing for December 4, 2000 on

issuance of Industrial Facilities Exemption Certificate – Novi Expo Center

CM-00-11-390 Moved by Crawford, seconded by Csordas; MOTION CARRIED:

To approve the Resolution to schedule a public hearing for the

consideration of the issuance of an Industrial Facilities Exemption

Certificate for the Novi Expo Center Property, subject to the

preparation and execution of additional documentation as may be

recommended by the City Attorney.

DISCUSSION

Member Csordas asked Mr. Fisher if it was appropriate for Council to discuss these memos even though you have this privileged and confidential information memo in front of Council.

He wanted to proceed carefully in order to avoid a legal problem particularly one that might lead to future financial jeopardy. He asked if it was his opinion that the motion protected the City and Council from any future legal action.

Mr. Fisher said yes with the follow up action he recommended, which was in the motion.

Roll call vote on CM-00-11-390 Yeas: Clark, Crawford, Csordas, DeRoche, Kramer

Nays: Lorenzo

Absent: Bononi

22. Adoption of Municipal Employees Retirement System (MERS) Resolution for Benefit

3. Approval of Budget Amendment 2001-4 for Teamsters Contract/Senior Van

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the van had a lift and if it would be capable of assisting the physically challenged? Mr. Klaver said they had ordered one of each. They were essentially the same van and the one without a lift held 13 passengers and the one with a lift and two wheelchair access areas held 8 passengers total.

Mayor Clark suggested Council should put a notice in the Novi News indicating a deadline date for anyone to submit his or her name and pertinent information. They would then be scheduled for an interview.

Mrs. Cornelius, City Clerk, commented Council was scheduled for Boards and Commission interviews on December 11^th and currently had 22 interviews every 10 minutes.

Mayor Clark said the last meeting of the year would be December 18^th at 7:30 PM and suggested coming in at 6:00 PM for interviews for the upcoming vacancy on the City Council.

Member Kramer suggested moving the Council meeting to 8:00 PM. Mayor Clark thought that would be fine. Member DeRoche felt the agendas on the 4^th and the 18^th were already full.

Mr. Helwig said the agendas were always full and the 4^th was a little complicated because the meeting was going to start at 8:30 PM because of the Holiday Festival Program at the new Middle School.

Mayor Clark asked if there was consensus to come in on the 18^th at 6:00 PM and begin the Council meeting at 8:00 PM? There was consensus.

Member Crawford asked the City Attorney if it was appropriate to interview for a vacancy that had not yet occurred. Mr. Fisher said the interviews could be conducted but no commitment could be made. He pointed out that once the vacancy existed the appointment must be made within 30 days.

Member Crawford said his position would be vacant at the conclusion of the meeting starting on the 18^th.

Member Kramer asked that Council members be given a copy of the notice in the newspaper advertising the vacancy.

Mayor Clark asked what the applicable cut off date would be? There was consensus the cut off date would be on December 18^th at 5:00 PM and the applicants would have to know Council would interview them that same night.

Mayor Clark said Council had discussed this issue.

3. Façade Ordinance – Member Kramer

Member Kramer asked that the ordinance be referred to the Ordinance Review Committee. There was a memo, in Council packets, from Mr. Nowicki to Mr. Klaver that was a follow up regarding adding brick to a façade of a pump house off of Wixom Rd. The memo said, "I have been advised that the façade ordinance does not apply to a structure of this nature". He wanted ordinance review to look at this and see if it was not reasonable to do this because the building was substantial in size and he did not think a public building should be exempt.

4. Discussion regarding a communication on the sidewalks on the overpass of Wixom

Member DeRoche said in Council packets this was under communications and there was a copy of a resolution from Wixom. He felt Council needed to get behind the City of Wixom on this for the safety of the public. He asked for consensus of Council to prepare a Resolution of Support.

There was consensus of Council to prepare the appropriate Resolution of Support regarding the proposed safety path at the I-96/Wixom Road/Beck Road Interchange.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo would support the motion as long as Novi was not supporting any funding. Member Kramer would support the motion but indicated it would not be appropriate for our Interchange. We are not backed up with a bike path plan that showed ingress and egress and it was not a part of our system and particularly on Novi Road they were discouraging that kind of non-motorized traffic.

Mr. Helwig said he and Mr. Nowicki participated in a meeting in Lansing and they did not push the Beck Road Interchange because we do not have the same confluence already there and ready to be launched. Both Interchange projects are severely over budget at this time, property acquisition, over and above construction numbers. They felt a further Novi connection might better serve the community, more centrally, where you are aiming at the north end 500 acre park as a destination on the north side and a lot of destinations on the south side. Secondly, they felt the timing with the squeeze on M.D.O.T. and M.D.O.T.’s position now is that the local community must pay for it. We do not have the capability to do it now but they are considering it for Wixom in this capacity.

1. Letter dated 11-14-00 from Bergman Associates advising of possible I-696/I-96

Reconstruction by MDOT in 2004-05.

2. Letter dated 11-15-00 from Oakland County Federal Aid Funding Committee regarding Ten

Mile Road widening project from Novi to Haggerty Roads.

3. Letter from Greenwood Oaks Homeowners – Re: Aspen Group.

4. Planning Commission communication regarding the proposed safety path at the I-96/Wixom

Road/Beck Road Interchange.

5. Letter dated 11/17/00 from MDEQ regarding General Storm Water Permit conditions

pertaining to on site sewage disposal systems.

6. Thank You letter from Walled Lake Consolidated Schools, to Bruce Jerome, for his

investigation of the water situation at their nature center.

Richard J. Clark, Mayor Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

Transcribed by: ________________________

Charlene Mc Lean

Date approved: December 18, 2000