Now that the city of Grand Marais can legally participate in the planning process for a new community center, there was some difference of opinion expressed Aug. 8 about just how much that participation should amount to.
“We can now discuss this…and we paid a lot of money to be able to do that,” observed Councilor Jan Sivertson in reference to council’s decision at its prior meeting to sign a settlement agreement with Burbach Aquatics. The agreement calls for the city to pay $57,500 in exchange for a mutual release of any claims related to a 2005 contract between the two parties, the terms of which Burbach alleged the city breached by taking part in the early phases of planning for a Cook County community center that includes a swimming pool and aquatics center.
Although the county has been moving the facility’s planning process forward, the city has refrained from participating or even talking about the issue since the litigation was threatened. On City Attorney Chris Hood’s advice, council adopted a resolution stating that the city had taken no action regarding the planning of a new facility, and that the city had in fact abandoned and/or suspended the project as of May 2008.
Council voted in May of this year to initiate its own litigation, and in June served Burbach with a complaint for declaratory judgment to have certain provisions of the contract thrown out. The May 9 resolution also affirmed the city’s “desire to support the Cook County community center’s future operations and maintenance…in an annual amount not to exceed the $156,000 average annual net operating loss the city incurs in operating and maintaining the city’s municipal swimming pool.” At that point, the county had put the project on hold pending a decision that would allow the city to take part in the planning process.
Last week’s discussion was prompted by a letter sent to council by the community center steering committee requesting that two city representatives be appointed to the group. “We appreciate the expertise the city brings to parks, recreation and pool management and look forward to having that expertise on our steering committee once again,” the letter states.
While there was agreement that the city should participate, there was some disagreement over how much financial support the city should offer. Councilor and park board member Bill Lenz said, “There’s not much we can say unless there is some agreement among us,” which led to council’s debate about what would be a “fair” amount to contribute.
Lenz reiterated his opinion expressed many times previously that city residents are often required to pay twice for such things as law enforcement and library services – once as city taxpayers, and again as county taxpayers. “It’s disproportionate,” he said. “The center is a county project, and it’s their responsibility. We should help with the pool…but I’m not willing to spend $140,000 up there.”
“The pool is important, and we need to support it,” said Councilor Bob Spry. “We shouldn’t be so concerned about paying twice.”
Councilors Jan Sivertson and Tim Kennedy argued that the city shouldn’t skimp in its contribution to the new center.
“This helps the city more than anybody else in the county, and we should pay more. It’s a tremendous asset, and a broader economic draw,” Sivertson commented.
Kennedy said he believes the community center is a significant enough project that the city and county should split the costs evenly, at 50/50. “There’s a value to having a pool in the community, and the city will be better off in terms of losses if the county runs the center,” he said. However, Kennedy added, “I wouldn’t give them a blank check. I’d put a cap on it. We have to be responsible, too, to the city taxpayers.”
Mayor Larry Carlson cautioned against committing too much funding to the project, especially for future maintenance costs. “I’m pretty proud of the city’s financial condition, and I don’t want to jeopardize that,” he said.
It was suggested that perhaps an agreement could be made similar to that which governs the city-owned library, which is jointly supported by the city and county, or of the existing municipal swimming pool, for which the county has agreed to pay a percentage of the annual operating deficit not to exceed $70,000. There was general agreement with that concept.
“I think we all agree that we’re going to give the community center some support; the only question is the dollar amount,” summarized Lenz.
Added Kennedy, “What is fair? That’s going to bear some serious discussion with the county board.”
Council then voted to appoint Sivertson and Lenz to the community center steering committee as city council representatives.
In other business:
. Energy Plan Coordinator Don Grant presented a revised
draft for approval that included modifications suggested by
councilors to emphasize the voluntary nature of the plan. The
plan has already been approved by the county board.
Mayor Carlson asked, “What are we committing ourselves to as a
city?” and commented that he has been getting complaints and
hate mail saying that the plan won’t work. City Administrator
Mike Roth assured Carlson that the document commits the
city only to send a representative to the meetings, and that the
merits of any suggestions or projects put forth by the committee
will be voted on on an individual basis. There is no financial
obligation, Roth said.
“It’s the hope we will follow this plan, but now it’s clear that it’s
voluntary,” said Kennedy, the city’s member on the committee.
Council approved the document.
. Roth reported that the city received three responses to its
call for proposals for engineering services and distributed the
applications for councilors to review. A decision should be made
soon, said Roth, because, “We have work to do.”
. On the recommendation of the planning commission,
council voted on first reading to amend the zoning map to
include property in the recently annexed Creechville area as R-1
Permanent Residential (Blackwell’s Addition section, 80 acres)
and RC Recreation Commercial (city-owned section, 40 acres).
There was no public comment received. This is the property
on which developer Matt Geretschlaeger plans to construct
Superior Ziplines.
. Council forwarded to the planning commission a request
from Arthur and Patricia Johnson, owners of Go-Fer Cabins, to
annex into the city limits a five-acre parcel they also own that
adjoins the Go-Fer property on the north. It is believed uniform
zoning will facilitate future sale and/or development plans for
the property. A public hearing, set for Sept. 5, is required before
annexation can occur.
. Don Wilson addressed council during its open forum to
express concern about the “very serious” problem of bicycle
riders traveling recklessly on downtown sidewalks and streets
in violation of city ordinances and traffic laws. Wilson said he
has witnessed several “close calls” with pedestrians and warned
that a serious accident could occur if somebody steps out of
a building and is run into by a speeding bicyclist or Segway
operator. “Whose liability is it if somebody is hit?” Wilson asked,
advising the city to “do something before somebody is hurt.”
Roth said he was unsure if the city ordinance prohibits bike
riding on the sidewalks, but riders on the streets are required
to follow state statutes regarding speed limits, stop signs and
pedestrian crosswalks. Roth said he will look into the matter and
report back to council at the next meeting.
Councilor Spry, who owns and frequently uses a Segway, said
it is his understanding that Segways are allowed anywhere
pedestrians are, and said he always slows down and uses caution
on the sidewalks. “I’ve never come close to hitting anybody,” he
said.
Leave a Reply