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

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

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo added, under presentations, Item #4, Proclamation for National Nursing Home Week, May 14^th through the 21^st, 2000 and requested Council limit speakers to three minutes and the presentations to five minutes due to the audience and length of the agenda.

Mayor Clark suggested to the audience if more than one was in attendance for the same topic to try not to repeat the remarks made by someone else and that everyone would get a full hearing.

To approve the agenda as amended.

Member DeRoche advised Council of a memo he passed out. A consultant was being pursued to review Health and Benefits Insurance and they were optimistic it might save the City some money.

They were, also, directed to pursue request for qualifications for City Attorney services and they have received four and expected more after the last ad was placed. The incumbent firm of Fried, Watson and Bugbee did not submit independently and had joined with the prosecuting attorneys for a joint submission.

Mayor Clark presented Victor Cassis with a Proclamation to recognize Rotary International Week. Mr. Cassis extended his gratitude to the citizens and Council of Novi on behalf of all members of Rotary International District 6380 for this honor.

State Representative Cassis said this would be a week of celebration of District 6380’s wonderful accomplishments throughout the year.

Mayor Clark presented Proclamations to Mr. Kohring, in recognition of outstanding service to the community. Ms. Johnson and Mr. Coury were not present. Mr. Meyer would be present later in the meeting.

Mayor Clark presented the Proclamation to Whitehall Manor earlier today.

Christine Olis thanked Council, Member Csordas and Mr. Nowicki for providing information and facilitating the process. Council received a packet of information, which included a signed petition from the residents on Galway, an informational article and a letter from a concerned resident. They were asking for Council support for a stop or yield sign on Galway Drive at Foothills Ct. They believed that the installation of the sign was a critical step to provide a safer community. Galway is termed a collector road beginning at Novi Road and flows through five subdivisions and ends at Nine Mile Road between Taft and Beck Roads. It also was utilized by traffic bypassing the congestion on Eight, Nine and Novi Roads. The volume and speed of the traffic has caused a great deal of concern among the residents on Galway Drive. This is a chronic problem and a quality of life issue and they asked Council to partner with them in their effort to slow the vehicles.

Ms. Olis said Birchler, Arroyo and Associates did a traffic study in March 2000 and the 85^th percentile speed was 29.7 mph with an AM peak period speed of 33 mph. She reviewed the data and stated the total vehicle count over 3 or 4 days was 1,811 vehicles. Of that total count 1,048 vehicles or 57.8%, were speeding and this was not acceptable. Vehicles travelling east from Center St. to Novi Rd. picked up substantial speed as they went 1,050 feet into a 4% grade and a slight "S" curve before stopping at Westridge Drive.

Birchler, Arroyo recommended selective police enforcement activities tailored to specific times during the day and they supported that. The police have been highly visible for the last two weeks and they asked that it continue. She suggested other signage and speed humps and radar monitoring by committee.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked that this matter be added to the agenda of June 5^th for action.

1. Continuation of Public Hearing on 2000-2001 City of Novi Budget

Mr. Helwig said they had taken the last meetings discussion and applied it to the revised recommendations for the proposed 2000-2001 budget. There was a highlighted summary and he asked to receive input at the front end of the process, sitting down with Council, before the departments start preparing budget documents so they could respond more appropriately out of the gate.

Six items had been highlighted.

1. The completion of major park developments – They had included a map at the rear of the hall that highlighted the four parks that gave citywide coverage and could be completed under this proposed budget. They were Lakeshore Park, Rotary Park, Eleven-Mile City School property and the Community Sports Park with well over $600,000 dedicated to this endeavor.

2. Focus greater resources toward neighborhood street resurfacing - This would be deliberated by Council this evening so that contracts could be awarded and significant results accomplished this asphalt and concrete season.

3. Establishing a Judgement Trust Fund – It would serve, as a beginning step, as a source for debt service payments should judgement bonds ever be needed to be issued.

4. Targeting resources toward risk management innovations – For example the in car police video cameras and the high school police liaison officer. They thought they were examples of reducing the risk exposure in the community.

5. Broadly emphasizing fulfilling visible community needs - For example the park development projects he mentioned over City wants. Some of the things being significant but would have to take a back seat to the front line City needs such as vehicle replacement and even doing a traffic model that would have long term benefit but not meet immediate highlighted needs.

6. To begin integrating the Annual Capital Improvements Program with the overall City

budget.

These are themes they had heard in the policy work sessions and trusted that they had responded to these in the proposed budget.

There was no input from the public and the Hearing was closed.

Mr. Helwig advised Council they had received an Ice Arena Financial Report that they did not think would be ready. Ms. Smith-Roy was able to get this done and was prepared to make a few comments and take questions. They also had the C.D.B.G. Item as well.

Ms. Smith-Roy said the Ice Arena was on track and showed a profit for operations for the month of April. Even so though, they have a loss of about $20,000 for the month, which primarily related to the $40,000 worth of interest expense charged to that department. As requested by Council they were calculating the interest related to the loan to the General Fund. Their goal was to have one single report by July 1^st to Council on the operations that Suburban was undergoing rather than having the mixture of the Novi and Suburban portion.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said for the public benefit the amount owed to the General Fund currently stood at $447,897 plus $200,000 being held for investing until the next interest payment was due.

Mr. Davis advised Council of communication from the Oakland County Community Development Division. The City of Novi participates with 50 other communities in Oakland County through the Community Development Block Grant Program. There were two changes they wanted addressed on a local basis. The first dealt with the ratio of spending performance for each community. The program was administered at the County level but it was through Federal Government Housing and Urban Development, and they really emphasized that local municipalities spend the Federal dollars they are allocated. The responsibility fell to his department to administer and they were to emphasizing the spending performance ratio, 1.5, for a total allocation. Over the past few years they had been receiving about $107,000 on an annual basis. Currently, their performance ratio was at 3.42 but had dropped to 3.02.

In the past the County had allowed funds to be accumulated over a three-year period for a larger project. The accumulation time was now two years instead of three to expedite the process of spending those dollars. They met with the County in April to review what their thoughts and recommendations would be and they had implemented changes. They evaluated their current spending performance and have recommendations for reprogramming which would help get those dollars spent on a more frequent basis.

They have ongoing programs such as HAVEN, Senior Transportation Services, Senior Center manager position, and Novi Youth Assistance grants for scholarships for camps. They continue to spend on these items on a frequent basis. They would be proposing to reprogram dollars for recreation facility improvements for Lakeshore Park. Those dollars were accumulated over a couple years plus unspent dollars for sidewalks along South Lake and East Lake Drives. Realigning those reprogrammed dollars into recreational facilities they would be able to address the Capital Improvement needs for Lakeshore Park. They are also looking at reprogramming approximately $10,000 for a new Senior citizen vehicle. Those are the two major reprogramming issues that would be brought forward for a public hearing and to Council for action. They would be able to reduce their spending components very dramatically.

Mayor Clark asked what needed to be spent soon? Mr. Davis said there was nothing at risk because the reprogramming of these dollars would take care of any dollars outside of the three year time period.

Jim Korte – Shawood Lake – 2026 Austin spoke about HCD funds. Lot 151 Austin water main problem – talked about the work that needed to be done at the top of the hill and side areas. It had been 2 months since he brought it to Council’s attention and he had not heard back. He said there are retaining walls and a staircase that had to be redone and asked Council how much would be done? He said it would have to be redone every year because of what a construction person did to the side of the hill. Mr. Korte was upset waiting for an answer about what the City would do with HCD funds and threatened to bring in the ACLU regarding discriminatory practices.

Mr. Korte said there was another house on Maudlin in violation of city ordinance and claimed Mr. Davis had known there was a plumbing problem for 8 months and for 9 months they had been dealing with the insulation in the roof level. Two other residents needed HCD funds and he felt it was unacceptable the way they had been ignored and asked what he had to do to get the funds. It was unacceptable that he had not received an answer. The water tap put in on 104 was really on 105, 106 or 107 and it still had not been cleared up. There was an August 3rd letter that stated JCK took care of everything but Korte was still not satisfied.

Mr. Korte was concerned that everyone in City Hall was notified by email that Ed Kriewall was a grandfather and asked what it had to do with the running of the city.

Mayor Clark asked for a report by the next meeting on these items. City Manager Helwig noted that he spoke with Mr. Korte and told him he will become involved to resolve these things.

Paul Sherbeck – Simmons Orchard Subdivision, commented that companies like Textron should not have to pay any taxes whatsoever and opposed any attempt to give money to individuals. He asked Mayor Clark if there were any businesses that asked formally or informally and said no one mentioned the Novi Expo Center.

Mayor Clark responded that if tax abatement were adopted, it would not guarantee the abatement. Mayor Clark stated he was only aware of the ones just mentioned.

Toni Nagy, Village Oaks commented 1) they would be having a homeowners meeting tomorrow to discuss the 9 Mile Road Bike path. She felt 9 Mile should be a natural beauty road where landscaping and trees would reduce traffic noise and it was a waste of tax dollars to put a bike path there. 2) Lakewood gave a presentation regarding roads. She met with Mr. Klaver and received a map but no further response. She pointed out in the prioritization, there was a deceleration lane and they wanted that. 3) City Attorney – she understood Council would be looking at hiring other attorneys and she wanted to see it advertised in the legal news and elsewhere and urged Council to hire municipal attorneys. 4) Ms. Nagy opposed Library expansion and commented the City lost the appeal and would have to pay interest with regard to litigation.

Robert Churella, 43564 Scenic Lane commended City on improving neighborhood roads. He went over the roads and was pleased with Council’s decision to improve them

David Kurtz, 43588 Scenic Lane, President of Timber Ridge Association, said the roads were badly deteriorated and was interested in having roads improved; with lack of sidewalks, roads must be improved as kids use them for bikes and roller-blading. The engineering study was done last year and delaying improvements would cost additional funds with continuing wear and tear.

Clare Wilson stated he presented a petition to Council to not grant tax abatements. When he obtained these signatures, 95% of those contacted were opposed to tax abatement and signed the petition. He felt all residents of Novi should be taxed equally and asked if there would be a select few that would not carry their fair share of the tax burden? Novi should not give corporations a discount to move here and thought of this as corporate welfare by granting tax abatement. He thought bond issues would soon come up regarding the library and roads and suggested there would be very little support if Council adopted this policy.

David and Naomi Ruyle, John Perrin, Jodie Turek, Kim Miller, Richard Jerkevich, Richard Dietrich, Ferdinand Gomes and Todd Cleary voiced their concerns regarding the Nine-Mile Bike Path. Privacy was the number one issue, along with liability, maintenance, and upkeep of the berm. Also, the city match would be $400,000 and the funds could be better spent. It had caused great distress because anyone could look into their bedrooms. Residents felt it would decimate the value of the homes along Nine Mile and greatly increase liability to their personal property. The retention pond was 200-300 feet off the road and residents were concerned riders might venture into the pond and would cause a liability due to drowning or accident. Residents urged Council to turn down this proposal.

Blair Bowman – Novi Expo Center Inc., said tax abatements were a difficult issue. They would pursue abatement regardless of what Council chose to do and he felt it could be a win-win situation. Tax abatement was a partnership not a welfare situation. He urged Council not to adopt a policy that would limit them prior to receiving all the information and asked Council to take a look at adopting the sensible policy on tax abatement.

Asa Smith, 1294 E. Lake Dr., spoke about the library issue and felt there was no need for a new, expensive library program now or in the future. He requested that a task force be formed to review it or do an in-depth feasibility study and thought that upgrading might be more cost effective. He suggested encapsulating the current structure and thought that there was adequate land space for renovation. He felt roads, sewer and water and health and safety issues were the first needs that should be addressed. He requested Council fix the north end roads first and help residents that have problems with septic fields. Infrastructure should be first now and in the future and main trunk lines should be available as needed. If it takes a millage for these, let it be.

Mayor Clark said Michael Meyer was present and he presented him with a proclamation in recognition of outstanding service to the community.

Cindy Gronachan, spoke regarding MDOT Garfield item on consent agenda and requested Council approve it and send it to Lansing.

Chris Pargoff, City Forester, spoke on behalf of the Friends of the Rouge inviting everyone to River Day at Rotary Pavilion at Rotary Park. Their focus this year would be Shawood Canal, Rotary Park and the Meadowbrook area. Sign up sheets will be at the forester meetings and next Council session. Mr. Pargoff encouraged people to solicit contributions for the River Day celebration on June 3^rd at 8:00 a.m.

Member Csordas commented residents continued to speak and stream into the Council

Chambers and he wanted them to know Council did not support this bike path.

Mayor Clark stated it was abundantly clear that residents did not support it.

Debbie Bundoff – Novi/12 Mile Road – thought it would be a nice gesture for those in the 48377 area as the lowest per capita income to get the HCD funds used in an area where those funds were needed.

Mayor Clark noted that grant funds must be spent on designated projects for a specific purpose.

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

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo removed Item B-1 for further discussion.

To approve Consent Agenda with the exception of Item B-1.

1. Approve Minutes of:

1. April 10, 2000, Special Joint Meeting with Northville Twp
2. April 13, 2000, Special Meeting
3. April 15, 2000, Special Meeting
4. April 26, 2000, Special Meeting
5. April 27, 2000, Special Meeting

1. Schedule Executive Sessions:

2. Monday, June 5, 2000 at 6:30 p.m., for the purpose of discussing pending litigation

2. Approval of Network and Emergency Service Agreement with Visicom Services, Inc. in the amount of $4,500 annually for emergency support and $85 per hour for network support.
3. Award of bid for Township Hall to Mark Adams in the amount of $7,160 (Historical Commission)
4. Adoption of Resolution authorizing the Run For Your Life Charity Road Race on June 25, 2000 and submittal of Resolution to Road Commission for Oakland County.
5. Approval of Change Order No. 8 for the 1996 Roadway Bond Program Meadowbrook Road Paving Project in the amount of $11,924.15
6. Adoption of Resolution creating a form "Notice to the Public"
7. Approve Ordinance No. 2000-81.18. An ordinance to amend Sections 33-385 and 33-385 of the Novi Code of Ordinances, to revise the requirements for child restraint and safety belt usage within motor vehicles – II Reading & Adoption
8. Request for approval of Entryway Sign Agreement for Riverbridge Subdivision
9. Approve Introduction of Resolution for vacating Erma Street and set public hearing for

June 5, 2000

10. Authorization for City Clerk to execute Claim of Interest – Parcel No. 50-22-02-151-031
11. Approve Claims and Accounts:

1. Warrant No 572

Member Kramer would not support the motion. There was an inconsistency in it under NOW, THEREFORE, 1. "The purchase be made with a conservation easement placed on the entire 106 acres of the property" and 6. "Maintaining of the conservation easement shall be by the Michigan Department of Transportation". This said Novi would purchase the property and the State of Michigan would maintain it and that was inconsistent. He would not expect them to sell the property with that arrangement. If the policy was to be used as written he would not support purchasing the property. He would leave it with the State and let them maintain it. He supported the intentions of the residents but there was room to work together to come up with a very modest, passive use of the area that would not involve their backyards.

Mayor Clark would entertain a motion relative to Item 6 of the Resolution. He said an alternative could be "or the City of Novi should the Michigan Department of Transportation elect not to do so."

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo, maker of the motion and seconder agreed with Mayor Clark.

Member Csordas noted to insure that the numbers did not change the purchase price of the property would have to be $1.00 and no more. Regarding Member Kramer’s comments if the City bought the property then he would assume the City would be liable for whatever happened on that property.

Mr. Watson said once the City took title it would be their responsibility.

Member Csordas asked if it could be left with the State? It would have the exact same effect except the City would have no liability. Mr. Watson noted it was not known what the State would do with it after that or if they had any alternative open to them. Member Csordas noted it would be of concern to him that the City would, for $1.00, buy itself significant liability. He would support keeping the property as it was but if there was a way for the State to maintain ownership, maintenance and liability that would be much more in line to the vision of applying good risk management.

Mayor Clark assumed it would be covered under the City policy of general liability? Mr. Watson was sure it would be and Mr. Klaver could verify that. Mayor Clark noted if the State maintained the title Novi would have no control and they could come in and develop the upland portion of it. Mr. Watson said there was no reasonable potential for that.

Member Crawford did not want to pass up the opportunity to have control over the property and did not think they wanted the State developing it. He noted this property was different than other City parks. It is a mitigated site to preserve the natural wildlife. The site was pretty much inaccessible to the general public and the areas that are would be behind people’s houses. He would like to see it preserved as a wildlife sanctuary or whatever.

Member DeRoche asked if the conservation easement wording applied to everyone including the abutting properties? Mr. Watson said correct. Member DeRoche asked if it was excluded from human touch? Mr. Watson said the last draft was to keep it in a natural state. Member DeRoche asked when the City could put in penalties for violations of citizens that encroach in this area? Mr. Watson said the fact that the City owned it they would have the right to exclude people from there but to have consequences for that they would need to adopt an ordinance.

Member DeRoche noted the rules by which the City allowed people to enter it for conservation or educational purposes? Mr. Watson said yes.

Lorenzo

Ms. Smith-Roy thanked Council and Kelly LaLonde for her excellent detail work.

Member Kramer felt this was a reasonable budget and he would support it.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo would support the budget reluctantly. She did not support subsidizing the ice arena or the $23,000 donation to the 50’s Festival. She wanted the speed control officer and fire protection officers that were not in this budget.

Mayor Clark commended Mr. Helwig for whipping the budget into shape and providing a budget that would serve the community well. The next item this Council wanted to address was a goal setting session with a long-range plan for paving the last 13.2 miles of the City.

Member Bononi commended Ms. Smith-Roy, her staff and Mr. Helwig. She was not satisfied with this process and felt it was too long and drawn out. She believed that Council Goals and Capital Improvement in alignment could parallel Council into progress. She agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo regarding the ice arena and she was adamantly opposed to the police officer to the school because it did not serve all school districts.

Member DeRoche thought Council was posed with a challenge and noticed that revenue growth as a government would begin to taper off as the community grew out. Council would have to learn to live within their means and thanked Mr. Helwig for quickly recognizing that.

Member Csordas stated he had "cleaned up" the last draft, copied it and passed it out to Council. The beauty of this document was its simplicity. It deleted Paragraph 3 on Page 1 and Items G, J, and M on Page 2. On Page 3 it deleted Items O, P, Q, R, S, T and U. On Page 4 under Capital Investment B, delete "$25 million to $30 million" and insert $10 million to $30 million and in C delete "50-99 employees" and insert 25-99. Member Csordas’ draft was the policy they were looking at but it took out all of the language that was not necessary and it was based on the fifth draft.

Member DeRoche opposed a policy that set specific criteria for Council to consider abatement. This would be used by future Councils as the only criteria necessary to qualify for abatement. It was not the criterion to grant the abatement it was the criteria to hear the abatement request. This would be used as a checklist for future Councils and it was not what the City would want. Also, he thought the policy would be used to keep some from a hearing at Council that should have a hearing for abatement. A policy with too many criterions would have negative effects on both sides. The main objection he had to abatements was that they were being considered because of businesses coming forward that received favorable consideration by the MEGA Board. They are directing these businesses to Novi telling them they must get abatement from Novi in order to get the bigger abatement from them.

Member DeRoche stated it was reprehensible that this appointed board of eight individuals have the power to interpret a statute, which says, "there must be local participation for the State to give their own abatement." The MEGA Board had interpreted that to say that we must give our own local tax abatement. Novi does not receive enough money already. They under fund the roads, infrastructure and the things that Novi needed greatly and now they are asking to further set Novi back by not allowing us to get our own tax base.

He was not opposed to a tax abatement policy and thought a lot of businesses were unique and large enough and extraordinary enough that this Council would be shirking their responsibility to not allow them to come and explain their ideas. He felt Textron and the Novi Expo Center were large enough and had a big enough impact on this community that Council would be irresponsible if they were not asked to present their case. He felt it should be given to them and a formal policy was not needed for staff to identify huge projects as being different than the run of the mill developments. They are granted the right to ask for abatement under statute and should be granted the right to come before Council with Administration’s recommendation. The abatement policy should be limited to direction to Mr. Capote’s office or the City Manager that the Council would only consider extraordinary opportunities that were unique and proposed a benefit to the business and the citizens.

It was unfortunate that the policy debate already brought Mr. Bowman in talking about the Expo Center at the same time discussion was ongoing regarding what was good for the OST District. They would not find a happy medium with the two of those and it did not make sense. Unless this debate gave a very general direction, to Administration, as to the uniqueness of projects that Council recommended they bring forward he would not support the policy.

Mayor Clark commented Novi had to prepare for and stay ahead of the future or it would roll over us. Businesses in this country today are different and do not have to worry about competing in their area; they are competing worldwide and history taught if there was no change Novi would be left by the wayside. The long-range best interest of this community was to look forward and deal with the realities of the 21^st Century. He was the one to push for a limit of four applicants a year in this policy and it did not mean there would automatically be four abatements given. It meant no more than four need apply. If there were none given in a particular year because even though there was a policy and the broad policy was met but that industry did not meet the best interest of the community Council still had it in their power to say no.

There had been comments about paying someone else’s taxes; however each of our taxes are based on our own property not someone else’s and no one would pay anyone’s taxes but our own. There are a lot of desirable locations here and abroad they are developing silicone valleys that are seriously challenging and threatening those very same enterprises here in the United States. We can control our own destiny or let forces beyond our control control the future and the destiny of this City for us.

He would be very stringent and prudent in the application in any policy if there was a policy adopted. We can not afford the luxury of looking to or living in the past. We must look to the future. He would support such a policy if it was adopted but guaranteed there would be no give aways or freebies and he would fly speck any proposal that came before the City under such a policy if adopted.

Member Kramer would work with the fifth draft but had modest changes to it and supported Member Csordas’ concise version. The policy was not an inducement to have businesses locate in Novi. It was not proactive or seeking but it would be permissive. Our attractive location would be used to screen out and access only beneficial applicants. Policy sets up judgement criteria as Council looked at requests for abatements. The policy was aimed at substantial sized businesses and Council would look for good corporate citizens for the City of Novi.

In regard to the fifth draft he would remove Paragraph G on page 2. Page 3 Paragraph P, should state, merely, "that the positive impacts to the Community and where the benefits outweigh the abated amount of taxes", instead of "the jobs created". Paragraph U was not a criterion they would be able to assess very well nor one that an applicant could bring to them and recommended dropping it. If there was support for the simplified version, which did this, and more he would support that but if the Council wanted the more detailed write up he would support that as well with these changes.

Member Crawford concurred with the Mayor’s statements about the benefits that a potential policy would have for this community. Also, concurred with Member DeRoche’s comments that less was more, by having less criteria and guidelines Council had more control.

He was concerned that if abatements were limited to four per year Council was saying that it was bad to give out abatements. If they are good under the right circumstances why wouldn’t we want to give out as many as possible? He wanted to allow the number of abatements to be up to the Council and whether they thought abatement was worthy or not. He would support Member Csordas’ revision as presented.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo felt Council should be cautious, selective and disciplined. After several drafts she thought they had come closer on the fourth draft, Council’s draft, except there was criteria in the last policy she did not agree with. The type of use permitted should only be research and development and assembly and manufacturing that would be associated with research and development. It should be $50 million or more and should have a maximum of four years for abatement. The fifth draft was being simplified and diluted and was not at all as cautious, selective or disciplined as even the fourth draft was. Unless those changes were made she would not support the document.

Allowing tax abatement would not guarantee that a company would remain in the City of Novi. It would not be good for the City or Council’s time to listen to anybody that wanted to make their pitch for abatement. There should be a very high minimum threshold so that the extraordinary and exceptional projects that might warrant consideration are allowed. She felt the turn of events this evening would open the floodgates.

Mayor Clark thought the document dated May 15^th, the fifth draft, was an appropriate document. He wanted to see the provisions of the proposed draft stay in because he did not want it more generalized. Council did not have the time or energy to micromanage every project that might come before them for consideration of abatement. He liked the idea of four abatements and if a fifth business was wonderful then they would have to come back in January if they are committed to coming to Novi. Four means four and no more.

The draft might appear cumbersome but it set a high barrier so that those who come here know they are making a serious, dedicated commitment to this community and would be meeting some very tough standards to even be considered. He wanted to stick with Draft 5 and would support it.

Member Bononi believed that whether there was a policy or not anyone could ask this question. Most of the corporations who would be talking about a substantial, above $40 million, were not really looking for our tax abatement as much as they would be looking for the mega bucks.

She went on to the two issues before Council either the Oakland County Tax Abatement Policy or the one that Council had brought forward as a result of their work. She felt Council would give away the store and it was a great concern in regard to the Oakland County version of the draft. The other statement of concern to her was that if the challenges and concerns of the future were not addressed with regard to economic development, events could over take us. As a City the citizens have the right to define who we are.

She felt the provision of the County document took the work done so far and watered it down and it could not be a good thing. Regarding Council’s policy she supported a policy that recognized only the OST District, that exceeded $50 million and only requested two years maximum. Her opinions had not changed.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Capote what he had heard regarding the City of Novi and Tax Abatement Policies?

Mr. Capote said everyone he knew was watching because many corporations were conducting site searches on a national basis and they contacted the State and County and himself and were watching very closely what was being done this evening. Member Csordas asked if any opportunities had been lost to increase the tax base or pay for many of the things Council had talked about?

Mr. Capote said the community would get development because it was so well positioned.

The real big question was who would they get? Would it be the select, nameplate companies that were very profitable and have choices as to where they could locate? There were some that had looked at Novi and went elsewhere because there was no tax abatement.

Member Csordas saw no reason to have Item Q, which stated "no City of Novi funded infrastructure improvements would be granted to applicants for tax abatements" in the policy. If someone was coming on any road, for example Meadowbrook with no curbs, etc., did that mean curbs or improvements would not be put on the road. Item Q served no purpose in the abatement policy and infrastructure improvements had been required by just about every OST development that we have had.

Mayor Clark read the sections, as they would be amended.

Mayor Clark read the Main Motion as it would be amended.

Member Crawford said Page 1-A the second sentence was not correct, "without creating a high demand for city services" was repeated twice. Mayor Clark said the repeat would be stricken.

Csordas

Mayor Clark stated the vote meant there was a Tax Abatement Policy and that was all it meant.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo would not support the motion and felt it was a cross over of responsibility. There should be a separation of funding between school district and municipalities. If the Grant were awarded to Novi she would hope the school district would split the cost 50/50 and that an officer would not be assigned until after the person was hired under the grant.

Member Bononi asked if there was a legal difficulty with asking different school district residents to support an activity that only benefited residents in a single school district? Mr. Watson said no; there was nothing that would preclude you legally from doing that. It was not a constitutional issue but rather a policy decision from City Council.

Member Kramer would support the motion but requested that administration look into combining the function of the officer with the D.A.R.E. function and report back to Council when the grant was brought forward for matching and funding. There was indication the school was prepared to contribute to the matching funds and asked that it be reported at the same time.

Mr. Helwig said there was no intention, if the application was approved to do anything with existing personnel prior to receipt of the grant and the second condition was to get school participation. What the Chief presented in concept was that the school would pay 40% of whatever the grant would not cover. He told Dr. Lippe that when Council was not replacing police cruisers in the budget that he felt it should be 40% of that $66,532. Dr. Lippe was going back to his board with a recommendation that they do that. There are two conditions to implementing this program and the agreement with the schools would come back to Council for their approval as well as acceptance of the grant and not until then would an officer be assigned.

Mayor Clark would support this. Our responsibility to our children does not stop and for too long we have expected the schools to do everything and to be all things but there are still problems that needed to be addressed. If we could partner with the school district it made imminent sense to do so.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo was concerned about the priorities of some of these. She did not think the staff had legitimized some of them in terms of priorities over other roads. For instance, Village Oaks was not included in the recommended expanded program. When Ms. Nagy brought forward the photographs it was very clear those roads needed repaving. She questioned the priorities of Country Place, Timber Ridge and Willowbrook Estates #1 and #3 over the Village Oaks area. She suggested by eliminating the Country Place Condominiums, Timber Ridge and Willowbrook Estates #1 or #3 the funding would be available to complete the Village Oaks and Lakewood area.

Mr. Nowicki commented that Timber Ridge, Country Place and Willowbrook #2 were on the list for recommendation to be included in this year’s program. Country Place and Timber Ridge had problems and had been on the list in the past and he felt they should be repaired now. Concrete roadways are different because the surface could not be taken off and replaced like an asphalt road. If these two subdivisions were not kept on top of there was a risk of further deterioration where the entire roadway would have to be removed and could cost many, many, times more than what this preventative maintenance would be.

Regarding Willowbrook #2 the north half was completed a number of years ago and he believed the south half should be completed before getting into another subdivision.

Mayor Clark said those roads in Lakewood that are public roads were scheduled to be done. Mr. Nowicki said that was correct and would include Villagewood Drive from Haggerty to Cranbrooke Drive as well as Cranbrooke Drive from Ten Mile to Nine Mile Road including the intersections of the major roads.

Member Csordas drove Timber Ridge and the cement was falling apart and sinking. Country Place had been waiting a long time and their roads are in very, very bad condition. He was in favor of Mr. Nowicki’s recommendation.

Mayor Clark said when Timber Ridge was built they had a serious problem with water and the longer repair was delayed on concrete roads the more expensive it would be. They would be aggressive in addressing these roads but they all could not be done at once and asked for the resident’s patience. If Village Oaks was not done this year it would be done next year no matter where he had to squeeze the money. He would support the original proposal.

Member Kramer would also support the experts recommendations. He said there would be additional funds available in the next budget year. Another opportunity would be the road bond program yet to be discussed. He would not support the amendment.

Member DeRoche had a lot of concern for completing the remainder of Village Oaks. He was committed to it and would fight for it but this Council needed to take the projects that had the engineering and the bids and move forward. He thought the local road priorities were a political decision. He thought Administration should be given a list so they knew what would be a priority to Council next year.

Member Bononi felt there had to be flexibility. She would not support the total package without the inclusion of Village Oaks and consideration for those residents living on dirt lanes who do not wish to. She would not support Timber Ridge being improved this year, not Vincenti Ct. and she believed there were three streets in Village Oaks that had real need for improvement.

Member Crawford said this had been sent out, bid, etc. and if Council started to change this it would change the whole bid and a whole construction season could be lost.

Mr. Nowicki said not all of the projects had been bid. There were some core projects that were approved by Council last year and carried over to this year and included Timber Ridge, Meadowbrook Glens and West Ridge Downs, which they had bid dollars for. The others were part of an expanded program based on the freeing up of approximately $1.3 million from the Municipal Street Fund and transfer into the local street fund to cover these extra projects. He understood the Village Oaks area badly needed attention. However, when going into an area and a couple streets had been resurfaced and then return the following year to do the rest of it there was a risk of destroying what was already rebuilt.

Member Crawford asked if there was any potential to get it started this year? Mr. Nowicki said they provided Council with a six-year program update, which provided the current year, and then Council improved the program with a resolution. Then the engineers were authorized, after the first of July, to begin the process of designing the project. During the summer and fall the survey was done and they began meeting with the residents and tried to bid the project as close to the wintertime as possible to maximize our advantage to get good contractor prices. Then begin construction after school ends. The DPW would go out and patch the best they could to abate any potential safety hazards. It was next on the priority list.

Mr. Helwig said bids were taken for the program that initially was to be implemented last summer. Those are represented in blue on the map, which is the local road portion. Those we have firm bids on and anything beyond that came out of Council’s budget direction to expand the local road initiative this year. They altered policy and all the Municipal Road Fund monies are going into the neighborhood roads except for those contractual commitments that they had discussed. The green that was hashed, on the map, was what financially could be accomplished and what Mr. Nowicki felt was justifiable. In approving A and B with whatever streets and neighborhoods they identify Council would be authorizing them to prepare Change Orders with the same unit prices that they had received on the blue. This entire program significantly expanded neighborhood street resurfacing programs rather than doing other major collectors elsewhere in the community. It would start in mid June and should be done in October.

Mayor Clark asked if there was any reason if Village Oaks was not done this year it could not be made the #1 priority in next year’s program? Mr. Nowicki did not see any reason they could not get to it. The local street funding should be available just through the routine budgetary process. If that had to be supplemented through the Municipal Street Fund they could do that.

Kramer

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the $250,000 for Vincenti Ct. should be held in abeyance until Council decided what they would do with the South Lake area? She saw nothing that justified why Vincenti Ct. should be in the program this year or last.

Mr. Nowicki said the justification was the engineers and the DPW went through it prioritized the major street and it showed up as a priority under the major street fund. They were dealing with an expanded neighborhood program, which derived funding from the local street fund. Vincenti Ct. was the only real major street listed for rehab this year. South Lake was placed on hold. There was funding available to do both. He said they could use the money set aside for Vincenti Ct. for South Lake Drive but there was already money set aside for South Lake. South Lake and West Park Drive was 80% funded through the Road Commissions program and there was money available for the left turn signal and calming effects under the 1996 Road Bond.

Mr. Helwig said within the week the traffic signal at West Park Drive and South Lake Drive would be installed. They are riding and walking the area this week along the lake to see where the public R.O.W. fits with the existing pavement. Mr. Nowicki had pledged he would try to fast track a package for repaving and a pedestrian way and have it done this year and the dollars are there to do that without disturbing the Vincenti allotment.

Mayor Clark attended the last meeting of the Library Board and they requested that Council tell them what their position was. He commented Council’s concern was the timing knowing that very shortly they would be presenting a new Road Bond proposal. He requested that the Library Board work with the Council and pursue the suggestion of a task force and indicated that he and Member Crawford would be willing to work on it as well as members of the community and the schools. They would move as expeditiously as possible to return with solid recommendations and a ballot issue by August 2001.

Member Crawford said the #1 priority now needed to be roads and they could not have conflicting ballot issues and another #1 priority was the task force to look at the whole ¼ section of property.

Mayor Clark asked Mr. Helwig if he would act as coordinator for the various groups? Mr. Helwig stated he would.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo supported a task force but would not hold the library hostage over the road bond versus the library. If fully prepared for a November election she would not hold them back because it was their decision. There was only so much interference Council could and should be giving to the library. She would not be in support of the Taft Road site with a Taft Road entryway and suggested they rework their current site. The City was not in a position to purchase property from them.

Mr. Brunett commented the date of the election was not their decision it was Councils. If she wished to make it in November a motion could be made to that effect. The same thing with the property the City owns. If Council thought they did not belong on that property then make a motion to that effect and that would give them the direction they were looking for. They are willing to work with the task force and wait until next July or August but stated they would like to have those issues settled very quickly.

Mayor Clark commented they would be expeditious to move this forward.

Member Kramer was supported in the defined process. He expected the task force to present a design and layout that would satisfy all three concerns and the residents. He supported that.

Member Kramer suggested a recommendation for who the members of the task force are. That there are so many from the school board, library, citizens and interested parties so they could be alerted and volunteer for those positions.

Member Crawford agreed with that direction but did not want to influence the discussion of the task force and wanted them to decide what would be best for the whole campus situation.

Member Bononi stated Mr. Brunett said that would not be acceptable. If it was not acceptable to them how would the task force opinion change that? Member Kramer said through the process.

Member DeRoche asked if this was just the results of a study or was it an actual ordinance to be pursued? Mayor Clark said it was the results of a study and Mr. Arroyo stated part of the recommendations would be to move towards ordinance amendments.

Mr. Arroyo said under Council direction they and the Planning Commission prepared an analysis and came back with recommendations to address the issue of future towers and communication facilities in the City. The purpose of the study was to establish community criteria for future wireless communications facilities. They tried to identify priority areas where future wireless communications could be sited and provide guidelines for the appearance of such structures. This was a planning analysis intended to establish policy and set forth framework for future zoning amendments that would come back to Council for consideration and part of that was establishment of an overlay zoning district.

The Telecommunications Act did specify that local government actions had to follow within certain boundaries, could not discriminate between providers or ban wireless communication facilities. This had to be kept in mind as part of the overall regulatory framework.

The current ordinance did give preference to co-location, which he thought should continue. Currently the I-1 and I-2 Districts are the preferable districts in the ordinance. They were looking at potential changes to that that might look at City land in other zonings as potential for future tower locations. There was also a maximum height of support towers of 150 feet and setback requirements depending on whether the site was adjacent to residential or not.

The Planning process that was underway contained the analysis of existing conditions such as existing towers and co-location areas. Also, looked at the potential high demand areas by population for daytime and nighttime within certain market areas.

There was public input as part of the process by industry officials and a more general public input process through advertisements placed in newspapers, notices to homeowners associations and input was gathered through that process.

They were now looking at possible areas for towers and for Council to adopt the study and ultimately revise zoning regulations. He pointed out, on maps, existing wireless communication facilities within the City and over a two-mile radius outside the city to get a perspective because some of those towers do provide service to the community. Traffic volumes were studied.

They looked at density recommendations in the Master Plan and employment density.

They found there was only one facility at the north end in the M-5 area yet the traffic volumes increased dramatically. There was only one facility along northern Novi Road, which was another high volume corridor particularly in the lakes area. There was co-location at the Haggerty and Eight-Mile intersection but there were no towers and there would be a demand for service there. Only one facility existed where there would be additional employment along the M-5 corridor. There are no facilities located near the employment center on Ten Mile east of Novi Road, the Walled Lake area and only one facility in southwest Novi.

There was opportunity to co-locate and they looked at existing tall structures and showed zoning that would allow tall structures up to 65 feet. OSC, TC and I-2 Districts all allowed taller structures where there was a potential for co-location. Sixty-five feet was not the type of height that would be a lot of coverage and was really more fill.

Public and quasi-public lands were looked at. These were land identified in the Master Plan as being land that was under public control or served a public function such as the parks, Civic Center Complex, Links of Novi, Cemetery and Tollgate Farms. It would make sense to put towers in some of these places.

Another component was aesthetics. Things could be done to minimize the visual impact on the community and they looked at examples of that. The Master Plan identified special treatment corridors with high visibility where the public saw the community as they passed through and entry corridors that would be highly visible to people getting off the freeway. These areas were sensitive and care had to be taken into consideration when there was future siting of tower structures. He showed examples of stealth technology such as the cross at Eight-Mile and Haggerty, Don Massey Clock Tower along M-14, Schoolcraft College Public Monument, etc.

The recommendations were to establish a zoning overlay district; areas for future towers should include public, quasi-public and industrial at strategic locations. A single tower in a preferred area could be a principle permitted use instead of a special land use. The philosophy being that if areas were identified that made sense and someone wanted to place a tower in those locations then one possibility would be to give some preference and allow it to go forward as a principle permitted use. All other towers would continue to be special land uses. In fact, the standards for putting a tower outside of a preferred area would be very stringent and would require a series of engineering analysis and data to be presented to the City showing there was no other reasonable location to provide service for the City.

They identified potential areas as the Community Sports Park because it was in an area that was currently under served. This was an area that would likely need additional service and this would be a type of public service and could also provide a financial benefit to a municipality in turn for providing a service that served the public at large. The Links of Novi was another area identified as a possible tower location because it was along the Ten Mile Road corridor in close proximity to the Harvest Lake Development and it provided an opportunity to put it in a very camouflage situation. Also, the area west of the Detroit Edison corridor including the City park property around the elementary and middle schools and the I-1 and I-2 land to the north. This area would service the Grand River corridor and the I-96 corridor. There was one tower in the area and they could see a second tower in the area given the amount of growth, density and traffic volume over the next ten to twenty years.

There are two locations in north Novi, which are very under served area. The co-location was occurring along the Detroit Edison corridor and the height of the co-location was roughly 120 feet on the Detroit Edison Towers. The very top was not always assessable and the coverage area with a lower application was not as great. They suggested that if someone went into a preferred area that a height greater 150 feet might be appropriate. It could be a 195-foot tower with four co-locators and the lowest would be at 150 feet. This would maximize the coverage and minimize the need for more towers.

There is a lot of City owned land and woodland areas in the north end. As long as they were placed so they did not cause environmental damage they could be strategically located so that there was a minimal visual impact on the residents in the area.

The remaining sites are in the southeast area of the City at the Ice Arena and they also identified the Industrially zoned area south of Nine Mile Road near the railroad track as another possible location to service the fairly dense population and traffic on Novi and Eight Mile Roads.

They were recommending that the setback of the tower be equal to 200% of the height of the tower when near residential or special view corridors and reducing it to 50 feet when abutting zoning was not residential. Eliminate setbacks from other principal structures and allow towers immediately adjacent to an existing office or industrial building which would block the view of passers by.

To send this to the Implementation Committee for review.

Member Bononi would submit her comments to the Mayor personally.

Mr. Davis introduced Jack Hickey of Riley and Associates who represent Sprint PCS and Bill Hickey who was with PCS. Mr. Davis said they had a request for preliminary site plan and special land use recommendation that came from the Planning Commission, for Council consideration and a sublease agreement for property at the Novi Ice Arena.

Mayor Clark asked if Council could dedicate any income generated from the lease to the reduction of the debt at the ice arena and reduction of the bond debt? Member Csordas said it was a great idea and Mr. Watson said there was no prohibition and that could be done.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the residents in the apartment complexes were notified? Mr. Nowicki said notification did take place within 500 feet of the site. Mr. Arroyo said notices were sent to the property management for posting. She asked if the pole would be visible from the apartment windows or balconies? Mr. Nowicki said from that location it was over 1,000 feet away from River Oaks and less than 1,000 from the other side but there was a tree line and railroad tracks. She was disappointed that there were no photographs or site plans.

She asked why the City wanted to own the tower? Mr. Watson said because then the City could lease out the additional space to other cellular providers and acquire additional income for the City. She asked about insurance? Mr. Watson said there was indemnification and they were looking into a rider on the City insurance policy as well. She asked if there would be interference with TV? Mr. Hickey said there would be none.

Under rent should there be a provision that if Sprint had or executed another contract with another community where they are paying them more Novi should also be paid more? Mr. Watson said that could be discussed. Also, making sure that this is the best deal? Mr. Watson said if Council desires. She would like both of these included.

She did not want the money to go to the ice arena but did want it to go into the General Fund for whatever the Council decided to use it for.

Member Bononi asked who decided that they should go the ownership route? Mr. Davis said when looking at the contractual provisions of the agreement they did comparisons with other public entities. The Novi School District recently entertained an agreement with AT & T and they looked at Northville also. If Novi owned it they could control the co-location and the contractual provisions of those co-locations. They patterned after an existing agreement that was taken from the school district agreement and it was basically the direction he received from Mr. Kriewal when the process was started and he continued forward to discussions with Mr. Watson.

She asked if there were any lights on the monopole? Mr. Davis said no. Who would pay to take the pole down if it became obsolete and what would it cost? Mr. Davis said Sprint would be required to remove their equipment and the pole belonged to the City and he did not have a cost estimate. Mr. Hickey said it would cost about $12,000 to take down and the pole value would be about $10,000 so the net deficit would be about $2,000.

She said with regard to Page 11 at the top, why would the City want to retain the improvements that serve this facility as opposed to having the provider remove them and how much would it cost to remove them? Mr. Hickey said they might want to maintain them as co-locators.

She asked how this lease would affect the City’s ability to sell the ice arena site? Mr. Watson said it would not preclude them from selling the site but it would be something they would have to negotiate in the sale whether the City would retain it or not.

Member Bononi did not think ownership was a good idea with regard to the responsibilities, liabilities and the insurance. She would adamantly not be in favor of applying any of the proceeds to the ice arena. The ice arena was a business venture and should stand on its own merit and she would not agree to prop it up. Any benefit that the City derived should go to the General Fund.

Member DeRoche commented that miraculously there had been no objection from the citizens regarding this and yet Council could talk about it for an hour tonight after spending a great deal of time protecting ourselves from people with $50 million businesses coming forward and asking for abatements. Our priorities are amazing sometimes. He would support this and also felt the money from the tower should go to the ice arena.

Mayor Clark said the reason they decided to get into the business was because they missed an opportunity before that would have generated substantial income for the City. It was now sitting on school property and could have been on City property providing money to pay for other improvements that could have taken place in this City. This would generate income not only from the initial tenant but also from other tenants, it would be a City business and he felt the money should go to eliminating some of that debt.

Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo asked if the motion included renegotiating the fee and rent portion of the contract? Member DeRoche said it would include that because he did not think they were agreed fully on executing the contract. Is that correct Mr. Watson? Mr. Watson wanted him to make whatever recommendation changes he wanted as part of the motion and they would be included.

Member Csordas asked Mr. Hickey if there were any other towers in Novi? He said they were in three or four locations in the City. Member Csordas asked how much they were paid? He said he could not tell him. Mr. Neff said economically this was way over market for Sprint and he did not think they could agree to the most favored because it would depend on five years from now and if they needed a site. He said this was a very good deal and well over market and happened to be a site they really need. It was the best deal with Sprint but he could not commit to a most favored City deal. Member Csordas said he could appreciate that.

Member Csordas commented to Mr. Watson that he would like to know what they were paying other people in the City for this service.

Member Crawford asked if this "most favorable" thing was included in the motion? Member DeRoche said it was. He asked how it would be monitored? Member DeRoche said it was a contractual thing and he would expect them to be good business people and not deceive the City.

Mr. Hickey asked if this was only in the City of Novi? Mayor Pro Tem Lorenzo said no. Mr. Hickey said they had 17,000 of these facilities throughout the United States and there was no way they would be able to do this.

Mayor Clark said Council lost one opportunity in the past lets not over stretch it and lose a second.

Member Kramer asked that it be included in the motion as a request for the City attorney to negotiate on that count.

Member DeRoche suggested using Oakland County because there are a large enough number of Cities that are comparable to Novi that would provide some insulation. Mr. Hickey asked if this went both ways? Member DeRoche said no. Mr. Hickey said this was one of the highest rents they were paying in the United States.

Member Csordas said Member Crawford was right the first time and he agreed with Mayor Clark that they should not let an opportunity go. We are looking a gift horse in the mouth and we have no reason not to believe them and if that was what it was lets not pass it up.

To table until the June 5^th meeting and place first on the agenda.

Asa Smith was pleased with the hard work on the budget and adopting a tax abatement policy. He was disappointed with Garfield Rd./MDOT resolution, as he felt upset that the Garfield residents should not have their own private park and it was not fair to other residents. He asked Council to reconsider this.

CONSENT AGENDA REMOVALS FOR COUNCIL ACTION (Consent Agenda items, which have been removed for discussion and/or action)

B 1. Schedule Executive Session immediately following the meeting, for the purpose of discussing pending litigation. – Removed by Lorenzo

To schedule an Executive Session immediately following the meeting

To have administration place Item #4 on the June 5^th

Mr. Helwig said a motion could be made tonight to say do not pursue this any further.

Mayor Clark said the only reason that they would do it at a regular meeting was to make it a #1 Item under Matters for Council Action Part 1 and word it as the consensus of Council that they do not want to proceed.

Member Bononi saw no reason to delay this.

Mayor Clark said it had always been the policy of the Council that when affirmative action was to be taken whether to approve or disapprove an item that it was a regular action item to act on and it would not appear under Mayor and Council Issues.

Mr. Watson said it was not a Roberts Rules issue. It had been a practice of City Council. His recollection of Council’s rules or organization and order of business was that it was not incorporated in there.

Mayor Clark said #1, #2, #3 and #5 have been deferred and #4 would come back before Council and asked Mr. Helwig if he wanted to address #6?

Mr. Helwig said they distributed a memo based upon the meeting that the Erickson Retirement Communities had with them. Mr. Fred Walker would like to make a tour available to the Council and staff, whenever they would like to arrange it, of Henry Ford Village which was a denser development than what would be proposed on the acreage in Novi.

Mayor Clark had suggested a Saturday and they indicated they would provide transportation for the Council to look at their facility in Dearborn. It was a high-end facility for seniors, was very nice and provided a full scale of services. He would be willing to look at it and tour the existing facility.

Member Crawford asked if 13 Mile west of M-5 was OST? Mr. Arroyo said if it was on the north side it was RA.

1. Discussion of scheduling a Council Meeting for every Monday Night-Mayor Clark - Deferred

Debbie Bundoff also commented that she was very upset that she waited for the last audience participation to hear about the 12Mile Road update and it was 1:10 a.m. and it was now being deferred until next meeting. Stated she could have gone home 5 hours ago.

To adjourn the meeting at 1:15 AM.

_____________________________ ___________________________

Richard J. Clark, Mayor Maryanne Cornelius, City Clerk

Transcribed by: __________________________

Charlene Mc Lean

Date approved: June 5, 2000