Mayor Landry called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.

ROLL CALL: Mayor Landry, Mayor Pro Tem Capello-absent/excused, Council Members Crawford, Gatt, Margolis, Mutch, Staudt

ALSO PRESENT: Clay Pearson, City Manager

Pamela Antil, Assistant City Manager

Tom Schultz, City Attorney

Randy Auler, Director of Parks, Recreation and Forestry

Laura Casey, President of the Library Board, was present to share with Council some of the great accomplishments the Library had in the past twelve months and said a report would follow. She said one of the key criteria when talking about public service and libraries was the size of the population that the library serviced. This past year the library was certified as a Class Six library, which put them in the same class as the libraries in Farmington, West Bloomfield and Canton. Ms. Casey commented they average 800 patrons visiting the library on a daily basis; in the past year they had 55 days when over 1,000 visitors used the library. Ms. Casey said they had circulated more material than any of the other 56 libraries in their consortium with over 580,000 materials coming in and out of their doors. She said among those materials were materials in any one of the 17 additional languages, other than English, that they had in their collection. She said a new director was hired in November and thanks to Council’s recent appointments there were two very active student members on their board. She said one of the areas the library was best known for was the youth programs and this past year for their summer reading program they had almost 1,500 teen, youth and adults who participated and an additional 75 team volunteers who assisted with registrations of some of the other activities around the reading program. They also had 11 teams of fifth and sixth grade Novi students who participated in their fifth annual Battle of the Books. They delivered almost 3,500 items to off site senior residents and those living in assisted living locations. Ms. Casey stated another focus during the past year had been communication to Novi residents and they recently started their monthly e-newsletter, which was currently being sent to 173 people. She noted anyone who would like to sign up could do so on their homepage. In August they started a cable show, Beyond Books, which aired frequently on Channel 13.

Finally, they obtained a new URL for their web site, www.novilibrary.org. Ms. Casey said Novi residents overwhelmingly approved a bond to build a new library building and they expected to open the doors in early 2010. However, while they were focused on the new library, they had not slowed down on their current activities. They had provided meeting space this past year for more than 18,000 people and over 16,000 people attended their programs.

Ms. Casey said they would launch their new web site August 26th, which would have a new look and feel and had enhanced search functions. She commented that there was an on line book club and RSS feeds for those who wanted to know what new materials were coming into the library. She said they were partnering with Macy’s on a fundraiser on September 20th and for $5.00 Novi residents could purchase a 20% off coupon for use at any Macy’s on that day. The coupons were being sold in the library until the day of the event. They would also be sold by board members and library staff at Macy’s on September 6th. She said Julie Farkas also had coupons with her this evening, if anyone would like to buy one tonight.

Ms. Casey said the ground breaking ceremony for the new building was scheduled for Wednesday, November 12th at 9 A.M. She asked everyone to check the library web site for more information.

Jerry Shaba, owner of property adjacent to the street to be vacated, asked how it would be divided. Mayor Landry told Mr. Shaba that this would be addressed as Item 5 on the agenda.

Mayor Landry removed Item G on behalf of Mayor Pro Tem Capello, to be addressed under Consent Agenda removals.

A. Approve Minutes of:

1. August 11, 2008 – Regular meeting

B. Enter Executive Session immediately following the regular meeting of August 25, 2008 in the Council Annex for the purpose of discussing pending litigation, property acquisition, labor negotiations and privileged correspondence from legal counsel.

C. Approval of Resolution to approve Amendment Number 3 to the Agreement between the Michigan Department of Natural Resources and the City of Novi for the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund Grant number TF 05-165 (Village Wood Lake/Orchard Hills West Acquisition) to extend Project Agreement to December 31, 2008.

D. Approval of the 2008-2009 Winter Maintenance Agreement between the City of Novi and the Road Commission for Oakland County for snow and ice control on county- owned roads within Novi’s jurisdiction. 

E. Approval of Agreement with the Roma Ridge Homeowners’ Association to upgrade an existing standard utility light and equipment for a decorative streetlight at the subdivision entrance located at 10 Mile and Roma Ridge Drive. 

F. Approval to award a one year contract with two annual renewal options to Debbie Bye for Hair Salon services at Meadowbrook Commons beginning September 1, 2008.

H. Approval of Resolution designating City-owned property adjacent to Rotary Park as parkland and property adjacent to Lakeshore Park as parkland. (Property is being acquired by City from Oakland County).

I. Approval of a contract amendment to FTC&H for additional construction engineering services for the Lanny’s District Sanitary Sewage Lift Station and Force Main projects in the amount of $18,430.42.

J. Acceptance of an Amendment to Water System Easement from LaSalle Bank for consideration in conjunction with the Pontiac Trail Water Main Extension Project (Parcel ID No. 22-03-101-011; LaSalle Bank donated easement).

K. Approval of a contract amendment to FTC&H for additional construction engineering services for the Country Place & Stonehenge Sanitary Sewage Lift Station project in the amount of $33,160.50.

L. Approval to purchase one 2-ton Hot Patcher from Bell Equipment Company in the amount of $18,000.

M. Consideration of request from Mongolian Operating Company, LLC to transfer all interest in 2008 Class C licensed business, located at 43155 Main, suite 200, Novi, MI 48375, Oakland County, from existing members, William T. Downs, III (21.10%). Matthew G. Kirby (19.20%), WTD III Enterprises, Inc. (49.71%) and David Ulgenap (9.99%) to new member, DK Group 2008, Inc.

N. Approval of Claims and Accounts – Warrant No. 775

Mr. Pearson said early this year Council identified a priority of bringing the Fuerst property to a higher and better public use. He said Council had looked at two concepts and had endorsed one of them and Administration had moved forward and removed some of the structures that had existed on the property. He said the next step was to hire a design firm to take those concepts, vet them out further and spend time with the Parks, Recreation and Forestry Commission, staff and public and bring back to Council alternatives and options for how the property could be developed and brought to a higher public use.

Member Gatt stated he had talked with Mayor Pro Tem Capello and concurred that when this process began he would like to see the Council fully involved in it. He didn’t just want to see and chose a concept; he wanted to see Council more actively involved in the vetting process.

Member Margolis asked what the projected completion of the design was.

Mr. Auler said they looked at target construction for the first phase and initial development that was funded in the budget beginning this spring and completed by early to mid July depending on timing for the construction period and the season. He said the park would be available for community use next summer. Member Margolis asked if there was a timeline for the portion being approved tonight. Mr. Auler said the target was October or November of this season. In January they would move into the construction documents and detailed design and would look to engage Council fully throughout the process. Member Margolis noted there would be opportunities for citizens to give their input and Mr. Auler agreed. Member Margolis said she assumed that this would be a broad design that would include some recommendations for phasing and because they had set aside some money for the development, it would include those kinds of recommendations.

Member Staudt said he had the opportunity to work with Hamilton Anderson in the past and he was very pleased that they came in as the low bidder. He said they had done exceptional work throughout metro Detroit and all around the country and the world. He said his working experience with them was that they were extremely willing to listen and they would come back with a product that represented what Council was looking for. He thought Novi would be well served.

Mayor Landry commented that in the materials they had been provided, it appeared to him that the October 9, 2008 Parks, Recreation and Forestry Commission meeting would provide an opportunity for members of the community to come and speak and give the Parks Commission their suggestions and thoughts on any and all amenities and design ideas for the park. He said the Parks Commission would consider all those and weigh in with their own personal input. Mr. Auler said he was correct. Mayor Landry said then the public was specifically invited October 9, 2008 to the Parks, Recreation and Forestry meeting. Mr. Auler said yes, and they would be getting information out to invite the citizens and engage them in that process.

Member Mutch said the two conceptual plans from McKenna specifically incorporated the property at the entrance to the high school that still belonged to the school district. Since there wasn’t an active discussion with the school district about the utilization of that property, he asked, regarding the direction Hamilton Anderson would be given, if they would still be looking at the property for use. Mr. Auler said the initial target would be for the property that the City currently owned and in the event that the other property was available for incorporation into the plan, then it would be included. Member Mutch thought Council should provide some direction in that area. He thought they were all aware of how that would limit the plan, if they didn’t have the school property. He said in the design plans it was the focus of the active elements of both of those plans. Member Mutch asked if Hamilton Anderson’s design would have any discussion about the location of the Township Hall, or was that fixed in terms of how they were proceeding. Mr. Auler said it was fairly fixed and they were out to bid on that project so they could accommodate the time period for the construction of the library. He said Hamilton Anderson was aware of the location and had weighed in on it and would continue to incorporate it into the design as a focal feature for the park. Member Mutch said, from Mr. Auler’s viewpoint, when the RFP was put out they had encouraged the bidders to look at the McKenna plan B for the framework of the park design. In the memo provided to Council there was an indication that the activity building component of that was not going to be incorporated into Hamilton Anderson’s design. He asked what elements of the McKenna plan he anticipated being incorporated or was Council giving them more of a blank slate to see what they would come back with. Mr. Auler thought that would be part of the process as they went through it engaging Council’s, the commissions and citizen input as well as using the McKenna plan as a basis for continuation. So, they weren’t really starting over but there were things they would want to change or evaluate, if they really wanted to proceed with those portions. He said Hamilton Anderson had some concepts that they had presented during the interview process that would come up for Council discussion during the design phase. Member Mutch said he was not a fan of the McKenna plan B for reasons that had nothing to do with the demolition aspect of it. So, he would be encouraging Hamilton Anderson to view that area with a fresh perspective, as they were a highly qualified firm that could provide Council with some better design concepts. He said the library would be going in, the Township Hall would be moved and other than those two fixed points the actions of Council pretty much wiped the table clean. He said why not take advantage of that with people who knew what they were doing.

Member Crawford commented that she was confident the public would be notified of the process and would be able to give their input, as that was something that Mr. Auler always strived for. She said she knew there were people who had heard there was going to be a building. She commented someone had called her today and said a number of people thought there would be a performing arts center on that property. Member Crawford said what they wanted the public to know was that it would be a park for public use and there was nothing that said there was going to be a building there. She said if people had an idea of what they would like to do, they could come to the October 9th public meeting and hear what was planned. Member Crawford said she was grateful that Hamilton Anderson had been chosen, as she thought they were creative and that their staff was well known and highly experienced with what the City was trying to achieve. She said the public didn’t need to worry; they just needed to listen to what the plans were and then react or offer suggestions.

Mr. Pearson said there had been discussion about the Meadowbrook and Eleven Mile traffic signal as to how they wanted to design future such intersections. He said presently, there was a Council policy that said signal work on Novi Road, Grand River Avenue and Twelve Mile Road would have the metal decorative mast arms. He said there had been interest expressed of expanding that to other intersections. Therefore, they had provided Council with background on what was on the table, other intersections and some options. Mr. Pearson said they were looking for some policy direction on whether Council would like to tweak what was on the books now or keep it at status quo.

Mayor Landry asked if the 1997 policy was to have these decorative mast arms on certain roads in the City. Mr. Pearson said yes. Mayor Landry asked what the roads were and Mr. Pearson responded they were Novi Road, Grand River Avenue and Twelve Mile Road.

Member Margolis said it would be great to have the mast arms at every intersection. However, she thought they had to be realistic, especially in this economy, that it would be much better to focus on what they had been focusing on and keep it on Novi Road, Grand River and Twelve Mile. She said there was an additional $80,000 per intersection on those roads and the City would have to make up the difference at any intersection that had mast arms because the Road Commission of Oakland County’s standard was the two box span. She thought it made more sense to stick to the policy and try to do the ones on those main thoroughfares and do the Oakland County standard on the other ones.

Member Gatt concurred with Member Margolis. He felt they had no reason to deviate from their policy. He said if something occurred that Council might want to consider adding the decorative mast arms, a discussion could take place at that time. He said the economy was too bad to consider spending money on decorative items over and above what they had already allocated. He said he would opt to keep the policy as it was.

Member Crawford said she agreed with Members Gatt and Margolis. However, she thought the public should know they were not just decoration. Mr. Pearson said they provided a higher visibility for the intersection but he wouldn’t say they were safer; they also provided the same signal support. He felt it would definitely help intersections along Novi Road. If thinking about West Park Drive coming off the interstate, he thought it would definitely help to have mast arms with street name signs on them to provide that queue. However, in terms of traffic movement and signalization it would give the same effect. Member Crawford said she would like to be consistent, especially on the main roads where there’s retail and a lot of people pulling in and out. She thought the mast arm signalization should be consistent on those roads but agreed the cost was prohibitive but she would like to leave the door open for discussion.

Member Mutch said he had consistently felt that the mast arm signals added an important touch to the community. He thought the visibility and signs were an important way finding method for people coming through the community and especially those not familiar with Novi. He thought it was wise of the Council in 1997 to start their focus on the three major corridors but also thought there would be a benefit to the community’s character having them at other locations. He said certain roads like Eleven Mile, Taft Road or Wixom Road might not be best suited for those kinds of signals but he thought Eight Mile and Haggerty Roads would both be optimal locations. Member Mutch thought they accomplished things other than the safety aspect. They helped establish a character for the community and an identity, especially along borders like Haggerty and Eight Mile Roads. He noted he totally understood the cost consideration at $80,000 or $90,000 per intersection for the upgrade to mast arm signals. Member Mutch asked Mr. Hayes what the lifetime of the mast arm signals was and Mr. Hayes said about 50 years. He said for an extra couple of thousand dollars over a year over the lifetime of the signal, he thought they would have something that was much more attractive and spoke more for the community than the box span wire or what preceded it. Member Mutch said there were only a couple of signalization projects in the Capital Improvement projects pipeline, so it wasn’t as if they would be retrofitting a dozen intersections and spending a lot of money. It would just be a couple key intersections, Lewis and Haggerty Road and there had been discussion of Eleven Mile and Meadowbrook Road. He said the frustration he had with the Eleven Mile and Meadowbrook Road intersection was that Council expressed interest in that design, Administration looked at the cost and budgeted for the traditional design; they didn’t come back to Council until they were awarding the bid for the intersection design. He said then everyone said it was too late. Member Mutch said it was too late because no one asked Council beforehand if they still wanted to proceed with that design. He stated he was fine with leaving the policy the way it was. He said there were no major intersection upgrades coming up in the next couple years, so he could see them revisiting this. However, he thought it was a small investment in the long term infrastructure of the community and he would like to see them look beyond those three corridors. He thought roads like Eight Mile and Haggerty would benefit from that upgrade, especially where the City was working with developers or partners as was done with Providence Hospital and their new signal on Beck Road, which was not on the list but had the mast arm signal. He thanked Providence for helping to make that happen.

Mayor Landry said the mast arms were more decorative and he understood the way finding benefit. The street signs were bigger and prettier and these little characteristics of the community added to its identity. However, he agreed that the differential cost of $90,000 an intersection was a concern and a couple of intersections would be $180,000, etc. He said a lot of sidewalks could be put in for $90,000. Mayor Landry commented that it came down to priorities. He said they had a policy for Novi Road, Grand River and Twelve Mile and he would be content, if Administration was looking for direction, to stick with the policy in place. However, if there was a particular intersection that was going to be signalized, and after looking at the budget Administration believed it would be in the City’s best interest, they could indicate to Council that they might want to consider varying from the policy. He said he didn’t want to see the policy change right now and if there was a unique intersection that came up, they could address it at that time. Mayor Landry asked if Mr. Pearson needed any more direction.

Mr. Pearson said they had the policy and they would take Mayor Landry’s lead if something came up. He said during the next budget cycle, he would be interested in seeing if they could retrofit some of those that were on major roads like Novi Road and Twelve Mile. Mr. Pearson said particularly Novi Road to see how that played out.

Mayor Landry asked if anyone felt the need to have a further discussion on this issue and there was no response. He said they would talk about it at the next budget time.

Member Staudt said he read the information about the estimate and they had all been in that position. He said it was a very difficult time in the printing industry and it appeared that they had bit off more than they could chew. He thought the quote from the second lowest bidder was very reasonable and he would support it.

Mr. Pearson said Council should feel good about cleaning this up as it had been hanging out there. He commented they had done the leg work with the survey and were recommending consideration of the vacation.

Mayor Landry said if the Council voted to vacate this property for the two beneficial reasons stated in the report, lack of liability and increase in the tax rolls, what would happen to the property.

Mr. Schultz said it would be assessed, down the middle, to either side as was the policy. He said the Assessor’s office would do that. Mr. Schultz said they could put a caveat in their letter that there was a school of thought that said "unless there’s a circuit court action some title companies might not think it was actually split and appended to the adjacent property". He said for the City purposes and for the Assessor it would be done. Mayor Landry said if he understood correctly, the City Assessor would begin to assess the property to the property owners on either side split down the middle and they would treat it as their property. As far as the City was concerned the owners would each get 50% but there was the caveat that there were some that believed the owners had to go to circuit court and get a stamp of approval on it. Mr. Schultz agreed.

Member Mutch noted the letter provided to Council from former Council member Schmid, dated November 13, 2003, that sometimes the wheels of government moved slowly but he appreciated Mr. Schmid for being persistent in making sure this was cleaned up. He thought this made sense for the property owners and the City.

To approve the vacation of the remaining portion of the former Summit Drive in the Summit Hills subdivision.

Mr. Pearson said they were committed to Power Park improvements and this was a necessary improvement, which was the third element of multi year investments. The lighting was not up to current standards and this would make major improvements to the lighting at Power Park for years to come. He said they had also had on the books for a number of years improvements to the Civic Center parking lighting, which was not up to current standards and was the original lighting. Mr. Pearson said the parking lot had been expanded but the lighting had not been put in, so it didn’t provide adequate lighting throughout. He said other areas like the back parking

lot had been retrofitted with non-compliant flood lights and they were trying to get that updated. He said as long as they were doing the lights, they saw the opportunity to bring that up to speed as well, which would make it consistent so there wasn’t different types of fixtures and systems. He said they had looked at it hard and believed in a positive recommendation to begin this and complete the work around the Civic Center and Power Park.

Member Mutch stated he would support this but expressed his concern with the funding. He said particular bids came in over what was budgeted and some of that was made up with Fund Balance and Federal Forfeiture Funds. Then an additional amount came from anticipated savings from the property liability and insurance line item in the budget. He said the concern he had was the same one he expressed at budget time and that was when they got into these situations suddenly money appeared. He thought it was great that they were fortunate enough to have money appear like that but if that was ongoing, or was a situation where they were anticipating savings and particular line items or from a previous budget, he would like that communicated to Council rather than that they had a project that came in over budget and now there was money available. Member Mutch thought it took away from Council the discretion that they should have, which was to look at the projects they had budgeted, the money allocated towards those and prioritized them. He said now the money that’s available for a certain use was now being allocated to the lighting project, which they needed to do but was not the only need they had. He said two or three months down the road they might feel there was something with an even higher priority but the money wouldn’t be there to put toward it. He said he would like to see that financial information in a context other than a project like this. He thought that information should be communicated to Council in advance when it was known to the Administration. He thought it would be better for Council to have it in that context than as it was presented tonight.

Member Margolis said in light of the comments, she thought it was important to understand how budgets were put together. She said budgets were not put together with firm bids. The Administration could not bid out projects until Council had approved an appropriation. She said her direction to Administration was that she would rather they overestimate what something would cost than to underestimate it. She thought that was where they got into situations, such as this; they estimated something in the budget would be higher and there was some savings on it. She said they needed to estimate things as closely as possible but until it went out to bid they didn’t know what it would cost. She encouraged Administration to give Council higher than necessary estimates on these and encouraged the Administration to save money the way they had in every budget. She said that was where they got extra money left over to do things they didn’t plan on because the Administration didn’t spend every penny that was appropriated.

Member Crawford echoed Member Margolis’ comments and particularly regarding the budgeting. She said it was a working document and was estimated as close as they could get.

She said she didn’t have a problem with the dollar figure. She thought that proper lighting was a huge safety issue for a City. She said she witnessed one of the City’s light poles falling down once and they were lucky that no one was driving or walking under it. She also witnessed someone fall in the parking lot and they probably thought it was their fault. However, she felt that good lighting could have improved visibility enough that they might have seen something in front of them. Member Crawford thought it was just as important to have proper lighting in the parking lots as it was to make sure the safety issues were covered in the Civic Center building. She said they owe it to the public, it’s the public’s building and they needed to be mindful and considerate of safety. Member Crawford was very much in support of this.

Member Staudt stated two years ago he was a member of the Parks Commission when this was originally considered as a budget item. He said he was extremely disappointed in how long it took to get this done. Member Staudt said he stood 47 feet from a man with a missile bat recently and couldn’t see a ball on those ball fields. He said it was extremely dangerous and this should have been resolved last year as it was always their impression that the lights would be up last season not next season. Member Staudt said, in the future, he was going to be very vigilant in watching that these projects get done in a timely manner. He said he didn’t know what the delays were about but it shouldn’t happen in the future.

Mayor Landry echoed the comments of Member Crawford. He said there was a safety aspect to replacing these light poles. Mayor Landry recalled that a couple of years ago the City of Pleasant Ridge had a horrible experience where a flag pole snapped in the wind and ended up impaling an elementary school girl. He said this wasn’t a knock on Pleasant Ridge but they all had to learn from these things. He said it was the public trust that was placed in them and when it came to safety there were things that corrode, get old and become dangerous. He said it wasn’t only the lighting safety aspect there was the physical aspect of the poles that were under stress. Mayor Landry said he would support this 100% and thought this was getting close to the end of all the improvements and was very happy to see these things being accomplished. Mayor Landry said as far as he could see it was only the concession stand that remained to be done. He said the fields had been upgraded and the reports he was getting said the revenue received was increasing, which was exactly what Mr. Auler and the Parks Department said. He said the City now had a much more competitive complex; so there was more revenue from softball teams and they were able to use them more efficiently with longer hours.

CONSENT AGENDA REMOVALS FOR COUNCIL ACTION: Consent Agenda items which have been removed for discussion and/or action.

Mayor Landry said he removed Item G for Mayor Pro Tem Capello, who was caught up in court in the western part of the State today. Mayor Landry said Mayor Pro Tem Capello’s comment to him was that Item G was the approval to submit a Community Forestry Grant application, for a grant award of $20,000. He said apparently the City’s share would have to be $20,000 for a total of $40,000 to inventory street trees. Mayor Landry said Mayor Pro Tem Capello’s concern was spending $20,000 to inventory the trees and was wondering whether they really needed to spend $20,000 on that item. Mayor Landry said Mayor Pro Tem Capello was looking for a cost benefit analysis and was asking whether the $20,000 would be better spent planting trees rather than inventorying what was there.

Mr. Pearson said this was an estimate and the City was required to put in at least 50%. The actual work could be a little bit higher but going into it they had to put up at least $20,000. He said inventorying the trees was kind of like the street PASER system. It gave them the work management system to know what was up there, what variety of trees they had and to direct the trimming work. He said two years ago they inventoried street trees; so this was the next level by inventorying some of the parks and major roadway trees. He said they had used that information during the last two years and it had been kept current and provided direction for the tree crews to go out and organize their work. They didn’t have to go out and do field checks of a lot of different locations as they could pull it up on the computer in their office.

Mr. Auler said they used this program and continually updated it. They really focused on the updates in the fall and winter months and then in the spring and the summer the soccer program was generating the work orders for the work to be done out in the field. He said it enabled them to identify the tree by pulling it up on the computer system when a customer called in. He said they could find out the exact location, type of tree, size, health and various conditions and communicate that to the citizens. Mr. Auler said prior to the software package, they had to go out and meet with the customer, learn all that information and then get back with them. Mr. Auler said it had improved service as well as the maintenance and safety component. The first cycle of the software program focused on street trees and this was the last cycle, which would get all of the park trees within the parks inventoried and in the program, as well as all the major roadways such as Novi Road, Twelve Mile, Grand River, etc. Mr. Auler said it helped identify those hazardous trees and get a priority rating to those trees so they could be targeted for removal, and the City wouldn’t have a situation where a tree fell and caused personal injury or property damage.

Member Staudt said he spent quite a bit of time while going through the evaluation process of doing these inventories and found them to be extremely useful in the street tree world. He said they didn’t have the funding to do the park trees but he shared the same support for that project. He said there was a lot of stuff in the parks that were real hazards and it was very important that they were out there looking at them and keeping track of the health of the parks. He thought this was money well spent and would support it.

Member Gatt thought that if Mayor Pro Tem Capello were present, he would be convinced of the need for this.

Council entered Executive Session at 7:52 P.M.

Council reconvened at 9:06 P.M.

There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 P.M.

________________________________ ______________________________

David Landry, Mayor                                      Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

________________________________ Date approved: September 8, 2008

Transcribed by Charlene Mc Lean