[0:00] Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Monday, September 22nd West Fargo City

[0:05] Commission meeting. We'd like to call the meeting to order. Please join the commission in a pledge

[0:09] of allegiance.

[0:27] Will you please call the roll, Madam Secretary? Commissioner Jorgensen. Here.

[0:32] Commissioner Sundell. Here. Commissioner Dardis. Here. Commissioner Olsen. Here. Commissioner

[0:36] Anderson. Here. That's a record show. All commissioners are present. Item D is to

[0:43] approve the order of the agenda move we approve have a motion in the sec do I

[0:49] have a second to approve the order of the agenda second commissioners on down

[0:53] moves commissioner Jorgensen seconds I have a motion in a second is there any

[0:56] discussion commissioner we're going to move the item g on a consent that would

[1:14] requested that gaming site authorization for Devil's Lake American Legion post 24 at the

[1:20] lights event center be moved into the regular agenda. That will be item 2A.

[1:26] I have a motion

[1:27] in the second with that amendment. Is that correct? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Any discussion?

[1:34] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion

[1:40] carried. Thank you. Item E is to approve the minutes of September 8, 2025. They have

[1:45] been distributed and in the packet.

[1:46] Move to approve.

[1:47] Commissioner Olson moves to approve.

[1:49] Do I have a second, please?

[1:50] Second.

[1:50] Commissioner Anderson seconds.

[1:52] We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes

[1:55] as distributed for September 8, 2025.

[1:58] Is there any discussion?

[2:02] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[2:04] Aye.

[2:05] Opposed?

[2:06] Motion carried.

[2:07] Thank you.

[2:08] Item F is the approval of special assessment

[2:11] meeting minutes of September 15, 2025.

[2:14] Again, they have been distributed

[2:16] and iron your packet. Motion to approve. Commissioner Jorgensen moves to approve. Is there a second?

[2:21] Second. Commissioner Olson seconds. I have a motion and a second to approve the special

[2:26] assessment meeting minutes of September 5th, 2025. Is there any discussion?

[2:33] None. All those

[2:34] in favor, please say goodbye by saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Item G is the

[2:40] building permits. I call on Commissioner Jorgensen. I need to recuse myself from voting on this

[2:44] matter? Commissioner Jorgensen has recused himself from boating on the

[2:48] building permits. They have been distributed and are in your packet.

[2:52] Move approved. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve. Is there a second?

[2:55] Second. Commissioner Zundell seconds. We have a motion and a second to approve the

[2:59] building permits as distributed. Is there any discussion?

[3:08] There are none.

[3:09] All those in favor please signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried.

[3:15] Let the record show it's a four vote with one recusal.

[3:18] Commissioner Jorgensen.

[3:20] Next order of business is the consent agenda.

[3:23] I would remind you that we moved item G

[3:25] into the regular agenda, so we have items A through F

[3:29] and H and I.

[3:33] This is different.

[3:34] Commissioner Zandell moves to approve

[3:36] the amended consent agenda.

[3:38] Is there a second?

[3:40] Second.

[3:41] Commissioner Anderson seconds.

[3:43] I have a motion and a second on the consent agenda.

[3:45] items A through F, H and I. Excluding G. Is there any discussion?

[3:54] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[3:59] Opposed? Motion carried.

[4:03] We are now on the regular agenda.

[4:04] First order of business on the regular agenda is public comment.

[4:08] Adam Secretary, we have one individual that's signed up.

[4:11] I would invite to the podium Mr. David Withey.

[4:15] Good evening and welcome.

[4:16] Some

[4:23] tall person puts this up every time just for me. Good evening. David with

[4:28] the 24-21 on the cloud drive ease. I'm here just to address the budget. I believe

[4:35] that they've done a good job putting that budget together and I think it's to

[4:40] everybody's benefit that City Governments North Dakota now face similar

[4:46] issues that every other organization faces which is some sort of cap on how

[4:51] much you can raise. There's the customer acceptance of prices, price increases or

[4:57] whatever. 3% capital help, our staff become even more creative and figure out how to

[5:03] get things done. I would suggest that now with that 3% increase, we should know

[5:11] that of the 10 largest expenses for the top six deal with personnel, salaries,

[5:19] health care, retirement, social security. So overall expenses were 3%, those four

[5:27] combined went up to 6.1%, and they represent over 50% of the budget. As a

[5:36] result, that means everything else, on average, has a slight decrease. That's

[5:42] good for the first year. But for future years, we all know less is not

[5:47] going to work. And we're going to have to find ways to still make it work. And I would suggest

[5:53] the solution, a broad solution, is to figure out how to increase productivity, just like

[6:00] every organization has had to face over time. It's over by you. Only by increasing productivity

[6:06] can we manage not to decrease staff, but not have to add staff and still be able to

[6:12] more done. I'm sure that Mr. Grohl already knows this, Commando already knows this,

[6:18] already thinking the ways to do that. But that's the important thing to do. I would

[6:25] also suggest that remember that certain funds are for particular purpose. And for

[6:32] two years in a row now we're using the capital projects sales tax fund to

[6:38] fund a street crew. I'm not certain that that's a good precedent to set. The money

[6:45] was passed as sales tax for capital projects, not for employing people. So those are my

[6:53] suggestions. I think of all its very good budget. I look forward to seeing it being

[6:58] passed tonight. Thank you very much. Appreciate your time and effort.

[7:02] Thank you.

[7:04] Again, we had only one individual that signed up for public comment. Public

[7:08] comment is now closed. We move into public hearings, which is item number two on the agenda.

[7:14] We have no public hearings this evening. So we move on to 2A. Again, 2A is the gaming

[7:20] site authorization for Devil's Lake American Legion Post 24 at the Lights Event Center.

[7:26] This was a request by Commissioner Jorgensen, so I'll call on you.

[7:29] I think Madam Secretary has some more information than it was in our packet.

[7:34] Okay.

[7:34] Yeah, so the question was why is it not somebody that was local that came up

[7:40] before the meeting. This is an event that they do twice a year within West

[7:45] Fargo. It's just a poker tournament. Typically it comes across as Tim

[7:50] running Legion post 24, but they've done it for the past few years. So.

[7:57] All

[7:58] right. Any questions on that information? Thanks for the clarification.

[8:02] Yes.

[8:05] Move to approve.

[8:06] Commissioner Anderson moves to approve.

[8:08] Is there a second?

[8:09] Second.

[8:10] Commissioner Jorgensen seconds.

[8:11] I have a motion and a second on item number 2A,

[8:15] which is a gaming site authorization for the

[8:17] Devil's Lake American Legion Post-24

[8:19] at the Lights Event Center.

[8:21] Ascension at the Lights Event Center.

[8:25] Is there any discussion?

[8:27] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[8:31] Aye.

[8:33] Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you.

[8:38] We move on to item number three. This is the 2024 audit

[8:42] presentation. We call on Mr. John Hagen from Idaily for that presentation. Good

[8:52] evening and welcome.

[8:55] Good evening. Thank you guys for having me. My name is John

[9:00] Hagan. I work with the local office here of Ida Bailey. I've been with Ida Bailey for just over

[9:06] 10 years, servicing now basically 100% of the government world. So cities, counties, school

[9:11] districts, some special utility districts. But if it's government related, I pretty much

[9:16] trust it. Our Ida Bailey office has been servicing City West Fargo here for I think

[9:23] it's seven or eight years now doing the audit. So tonight we'll be going over the

[9:26] executive summary, which is kind of a condensed version of the financial

[9:28] statements. Financial statements get longer and longer each year, new accounting,

[9:33] principles, and standards. So we like to present the executive summary similar to

[9:37] previous years with some tables and graphs just for

[9:40] comparability and being able to see some trend lines over the last couple

[9:43] years. So with that let's hop into the presentation. First one being your

[9:50] audit results and findings for the year. So the end goal of every single

[9:55] audit is to issue an audit opinion. So what does that mean? The city management is

[10:00] responsible for three things. The financial statements are prepared with the proper accounting

[10:04] standards, which is GAAP, that they are free of material misstatements and that they are

[10:09] presented fairly. So we as auditors, we come out and through a series of standardized procedures

[10:14] and tests, we ultimately come to an audit opinion to provide reasonable but not absolute

[10:19] assurance on those financial statements. So the audit opinion as of December 31st, 2024,

[10:23] for for the city was an unmodified opinion or a clean audit opinion in

[10:28] layman turn. So exactly what you're going for from a financial statement audit

[10:31] perspective.

[10:36] With an audit opinion we are required to formally communicate any

[10:40] audit findings. If you want to jump to the next slide. Not sure who's running.

[10:44] If you want to grab the mouse on this one. Sorry. No that's okay. Then I can just scroll.

[10:50] Perfect.

[10:53] Now I got a multitask so bear with me. As I was saying so with an

[10:58] opinion, we do issue and present audit findings to those in charge of governance, which is

[11:04] you guys. Broken down into two different categories, first one being financial statement findings.

[11:09] I will lump the first two together, the preparation of the financials and material journal entries.

[11:14] I alluded to it earlier. There's more and more accounting standards and with that become

[11:18] larger financial statements. It gets a little bit tougher on finance, office and staff to

[11:22] prepare and issue those financial statements. So we as auditors are commonly asked to

[11:27] We prepare the financials and when we do that, we do issue a finding.

[11:30] With that, we do also propose a number of journal entries to be adjusted on the financial

[11:37] statements to make sure that those standards are being followed.

[11:40] Again, very common for cities of your guys' size and repeat findings from previous years.

[11:45] I would anticipate those two findings kind of continuing forward as well.

[11:50] The third finding is segregation of duties, which is a fancy way of saying having

[11:55] enough hands and eyeballs on everything finance related. Those auditing standards are getting

[12:01] more complex and require more hands and eyeballs on things. And when there's vacancies and

[12:07] positions it's really tough to do that. The city's had some turnover within their finance

[12:11] office last couple years and therefore has led to segregation of duties. Now that office

[12:16] is quieted down. I look forward to seeing the processes improve with the additional

[12:22] bodies and potentially removing that finding in the future.

[12:26] The second bucket there is federal wards. We'll touch on this on the next slide. Actually,

[12:31] I'll just go there right now.

[12:36] So a secondary avenue of every audit is called a single audit,

[12:41] which is the audit of specific use of federal funds of the city. This is required anytime

[12:46] an entity expense over $750,000 in a fiscal year. The city did spend about $2.2 million

[12:53] in 2024, thus triggering this secondary audit. This audit, like I said, is over

[13:00] specifically those federal funds expended and is much more compliance driven.

[13:05] So we do issue a separate audit opinion over those funds and the city did

[13:09] receive again an unmodified or clean audit opinion associated with those. There

[13:13] were no findings of any kind as well with those.

[13:23] Next slide is a specific

[13:24] kind of more of an FYI relating to a new accounting standard. This is a

[13:28] bigger accounting standard. Didn't change a whole lot from the number standpoint but it did change

[13:34] some internal kind of accounting and tracking of compensated absences which for the city is

[13:43] made primarily up of vacation and sick leave. It was a standard to kind of

[13:49] consistent recognition and measurement of those related liabilities. So strictly an FYI slide.

[13:57] So now we'll get into some of the numbers. I won't spend as much time on some of these

[14:00] slides just kind of let you guys take them in. I'll cover high level items as we

[14:05] go. First couple slides here are the cash and investment balances for the city.

[14:09] This does include all funds within the city. Again cash and investments is made

[14:15] up of a couple different components mostly deposits, certificates of

[14:19] deposit CD balances, and some investments in some treasury notes and

[14:23] related US government type investments.

[14:28] Total cash and investment balances for

[14:31] the city in total was about 110 million and change these slides are all

[14:37] throughout the night presented within thousands. So keep that in mind as some

[14:42] of the numbers do look a little goofy. I have to retrain my brain when

[14:46] remembering that these are indeed in thousands. So overall very consistent

[14:50] cash and investment balances within the city.

[14:58] Okay from a liquidity standpoint,

[14:59] So, kind of...

[15:00] One of that current mindset of cash and investments as compared to kind of your current liabilities,

[15:07] which would be composed of accounts payable, related construction or retainage payable,

[15:12] accrued liabilities, unearned revenue, and then the big component would be your current maturities

[15:19] of principal and interest of those debt. So current equity ratio as of 1230 on 2024

[15:27] is coming in at right about four. You can turn over your cash balances about four times and cover those current liabilities.

[15:34] This graph does exclude the capital project cash balances just because based on timing of debt proceeds,

[15:41] that can really swing this liquidity ratio as well as the timing of kind of project payments.

[15:46] So we do exclude that just kind of for comparability purposes.

[15:53] Okay, now the next couple slides will focus in on the general fund, which is the main operating fund for the city.

[15:59] first slide here we have our revenues and transfers in so ultimately money

[16:05] coming in the door.

[16:08] Compose of a bunch of different components primarily the big

[16:12] driver would be your property taxes and special assessments secondary buckets

[16:17] would be your intergovernmental money coming from county or maybe state

[16:22] grant money and then other components license permitting fees some other

[16:29] other things like that. Overall, pretty consistent year over year from a bucket standpoint. One

[16:35] thing to note here in 2024, the yellow kind of other bucket did jump significantly. That's

[16:41] due to a unique paper transaction associated with governmental accounting. Your guys lease

[16:46] proceeds associated with this building. It's a net wash to fund balance. It has to be

[16:53] recorded as proceeds coming in and then capital outlay within the year the lease

[16:57] was signed. So again, paper transaction net zero, but that does lead to a little bit of a goofy

[17:04] looking jump here in 2024. So I did want to point that out. That was about 7.6 million.

[17:13] On the flip side to revenue is obviously expenditures, a key component to all city

[17:19] financials. General fund expenditures, as the previous gentleman mentioned,

[17:23] largely based within wages within the general fund, wages and wage related type

[17:29] expenses, health insurance and other benefits. That's far and away the biggest

[17:33] category. Broken down into different departmental codes for the city. You have

[17:39] public works, public safety, general government make up your different color

[17:44] schemes there. Overall very consistent uptick within those overall expenditures

[17:49] over the last 10 years, which is to be expected with the growth of the city

[17:53] and just general cost of things.

[17:59] So all in all the last two slides come

[18:01] together and you have an ultimate impact to fund balance. In 2024 that net change was

[18:07] about a $4.5 million deficit. So it did decrease fund balance to an ending fund balance within

[18:13] just a general fund of about $14.4 million. So if you can kind of mentally circle that

[18:18] number here, the next couple of slides will focus on that ending fund balance.

[18:24] So ending fund balance about $14.4 million in the general fund. What does that do

[18:28] for the city? It does a number of things. First, it contributes to a favorable bond

[18:33] rating. So as you guys have additional debt endeavors down the road can produce

[18:38] better interest rates for the city. Secondly, it offers produces investment

[18:43] income and provides a source of working capital. So having your money work for

[18:46] you within the bank through interest rates. An interest income is always a

[18:50] plus. And then thirdly, most importantly, offers a cushion for

[18:53] unexpected expenditures or revenue shortfalls.

[19:03] Another pretty technical

[19:04] slide is broken down breakdown of different fund balance categories within

[19:08] the general fund. I'll be pretty high level with this, but non-spendable is in the form

[19:13] of money that's already spent through prepaid expenses or inventory. Restricted would be restricted

[19:19] by outside sources legally. Common would be debt service or capital projects fund.

[19:26] There aren't currently any restrictions within the general fund, but there are those

[19:30] restrictions within the other funds of the city.

[19:33] The next three, committed, assigned, and unassigned are kind of usually lumped

[19:36] together and considered as unrestricted. This is money that ultimately the City has added

[19:41] discretion to spend how it would like. They can commit or assign money for certain projects

[19:47] or endeavors and then ultimately everything left over would fall in the unassigned bucket

[19:52] which is your last kind of unencumbered and kind of typically considered your city

[19:58] reserves or rainy day fund if you will.

[20:06] So this shows a breakdown of those different

[20:08] fund balance categories. As I mentioned, there aren't currently any restrictions committed

[20:13] or assigned fund balances within the general fund. So there is a very small bucket for

[20:18] non-spendable for some prepaid items for $113,000 and then everything else remaining

[20:23] of that $14.4 million dollar bucket sitting in that unassigned.

[20:32] So I kind of let you

[20:33] guys take that in here before moving on.

[20:46] So here's another way to look at that unassigned

[20:48] only fund balance for the city. This shows trend lines over the last 10 years as opposed

[20:54] to annual expenditures within the city. Ending 2024 represents about 48% of annual expenditures.

[21:03] So another way to look at it would be the city could operate as is with no additional

[21:07] money coming in within the general fund for about 6 months. So about 48% of annual

[21:12] expenditures. So I know there's been some plan spending to deficit over the last

[21:17] couple of years to bring down some of those fund balances but certainly

[21:20] something to kind of keep an eye on with with the state climate on revenue

[21:24] stream constraints and stuff like that where you guys want to be from a

[21:29] reserve standpoint. We get asked a lot where should the city be? There isn't

[21:35] a really a golden rule. There is no right or wrong. Every city operates a

[21:38] little bit differently depending on if they're more rural, they're bigger

[21:42] city or smaller city. Typically we see somewhere in that 25 to 50% range of

[21:48] kind of annual expenditures with the bigger cities usually having a little

[21:51] little bit additional in reserve. So you're kind of right in line with what

[21:54] we typically see, but like I said there is no necessarily right or wrong or

[21:58] golden rule.

[22:05] Next we'll focus on a couple quickly on a couple different

[22:08] funds, other funds for the city. First one being your capital projects fund.

[22:12] This is a pretty big fund for the city with all the growth and just

[22:15] other capital adventures for the city. This shows your capital expenditures over

[22:22] the last 10 years. Again this is in thousands. So total capital outlay for

[22:29] the city within the capital projects was about, let's call it, 25 million in

[22:35] change. Very consistent over the last four years. Various projects throughout

[22:39] the city ongoing improvement districts and road projects, sanitary sewer rehab

[22:44] projects. Lagoon decommissioning are kind of some of the big heavy hitters. In total, the

[22:49] city does have about 44 million in construction and progress at year-end. So

[22:54] kind of projects that have been started in the past and still ongoing. But fund

[23:03] balance specific to the capital projects is a positive. It's pretty

[23:07] common depending on the timing functions of some of the the funding

[23:11] mechanisms for those projects for the fund balance to creep into a

[23:15] deficit, similar like you can see in previous years. There was a bond issued in 2024 for

[23:22] about $15 million, which did lead to an increase in that fund balance in 2024. So it's sitting

[23:29] in capital projects fund balance of about $8 million as of $1231.24.

[23:39] Okay, last couple of slides are going to focus on the proprietary or kind of business

[23:42] type funds for the city. First one being your water and sewer fund. Those are presented

[23:46] together within the city financials. From an operational standpoint this is a

[23:52] pretty nice slide to kind of summarize a bunch of different items.

[23:58] There's operating

[23:59] revenues is your top blue line there followed by your operating expenditures

[24:03] excluding depreciation. So the city is operating at a net positive from

[24:08] operations specifically with water and sewer again excluding depreciation.

[24:14] Once you factor in depreciation, which is kind of a paper expenditure, it's a cost of those assets built out over time

[24:20] based on the useful life of those assets. There was a deficit in the current year, which again is very common.

[24:28] You guys can see trend lines over the last 10 years have been very consistent.

[24:32] And then overall net change to fund balance did come in as a deficit, but again, it's due to that depreciation.

[24:39] Okay,

[24:47] next slide is your ending net position.

[24:49] That's kind of the counterpart to fund balance.

[24:51] They're the same things, different terminology within the financial statements.

[24:54] Overall net position of water and sewer fund is a very significant $310 million.

[25:00] At year end, comprised almost exclusively or a large chunk, I should say about 96%

[25:05] of capital assets, a lot of infrastructure built into that water and sewer.

[25:10] The remaining 4% would be your typical assets, less liabilities of cash and

[25:16] investments receivables less any sort of liabilities and related debt.

[25:25] Those are

[25:26] really big dollar amounts so a kind of a little bit better way to maybe look at it

[25:29] from a liquidity standpoint is year-end cash and investment balances. So what's

[25:33] sitting in the bank attributed to the Water and Sewer Fund. Total cash and

[25:37] investments is about 12.4 million, where if you go back a few slides, annual

[25:43] expenditures in the Water and Sewer Fund excluding depreciation is just

[25:49] over 10 million. So four years worth sitting in that cash investment balance.

[25:57] Okay, and then very last fund is garbage funds. So very similar to Water and

[26:02] Sewer, kind of a business type fund for the city. First slide here being your

[26:06] operating statement. Again, money coming in from operations, money going out

[26:12] from operations, ultimately leading to your operating income. We do include

[26:15] depreciation in on this just because the total assets in the garbage fund

[26:19] much smaller so it skews this slide much less. So for comparability it's still

[26:25] good to have that in there. But overall operating basically at an exact

[26:30] breakeven in FY24. Typically speaking we see kind of these proprietary funds

[26:35] operating at roughly a breakeven and that's kind of the goal of most cities.

[26:39] Making sure that they're sustainable for the long term but obviously not

[26:43] trying to make a bunch of money off the the citizens for for some of these

[26:47] proprietary services.

[26:53] Last two slides similar to the water and sewer fund

[26:56] here's your net position or fund balance for that garbage fund again

[27:01] attributed mostly to capital assets about 73% in capital assets and in

[27:05] related infrastructure total FY24 net position of about 4.2 million and then

[27:14] lastly from a liquidity standpoint total garbage caching cash investments

[27:20] about 2.1 million.

[27:23] There has been some decrease over the last couple years

[27:27] designed as money has gone out the door to replace some of the garbage truck

[27:31] fleet within the city.

[27:36] Okay I know I kind of sped through that there's a lot of

[27:38] numbers in there. Some pretty high-level stuff. Hopefully it was mostly user

[27:43] friendly but any questions before I go tonight? Questions from Mr. Higgin?

[27:50] Okay well if anything does come up feel free to relay those through Dustin

[27:53] or Willie and we'll be happy to get back to you. Thank you guys for

[27:56] have me and I do want to give a special thank you to the finance office,

[28:00] William team. We can be pretty demanding for a couple of months with

[28:03] requests and questions, phone calls, meeting stuff like that and they're

[28:07] always responsive and very helpful so they make our lives pretty easy. So we

[28:10] appreciate working with you guys and look forward to more successful audits

[28:15] in the future. Thank you sir. Thank you guys.

[28:21] I am going to ask for a motion

[28:23] please, yes. I would make a motion to accept the 2024 audit. Commissioner

[28:27] Zundale moves to approve the 2024 audit presentation by I'd Bailey. Is there a

[28:33] second? Second. Commissioner Olson seconds. We have a motion and a second to accept

[28:38] the audit presentation for 2024 from the City of West Fargo. Is there any

[28:43] discussion?

[28:45] Hearing none, all those in favor please signify by saying aye.

[28:48] Aye. Opposed? Motion carried.

[28:55] We move on to item number four. Item number four

[28:58] is a presentation by our economic development director, Casey Sanders-Berglin, and is in

[29:04] regard of business incentive request. Good evening and welcome.

[29:11] Good evening, Commission President Dardis. Commissioners,

[29:17] the application for rate of

[29:18] night is for sign badgers. This is a name you'll likely recognize in business as it

[29:24] was founded in West Fargo and remained here for the last 15 years. Within the last

[29:29] As of the month this business ownership has changed, the brand, product, and team remain as sign badgers

[29:36] and are looking ahead at their next steps centered around stability and potential growth.

[29:41] However, moving forward begins with a new location for this business.

[29:46] During the search for space, sign badgers has identified two top choices,

[29:51] one of which is located in West Fargo and the other one in Fargo.

[29:55] Both of these spaces are approximately 5,000 square feet.

[30:00] The requirements for the space are a bit unique, as they need to accommodate a hyper-clean environment

[30:07] for printing equipment, as well as ventilation, air, and handling for computer and precision

[30:15] cutting, painting, and laser engraving equipment. We're also offering a space for design, collaborative

[30:23] of spaces and operations offices. Signed-bedders is proud of their roots in West Fargo and would

[30:30] like to remain. However, when comparing the two options, the space in Fargo requires

[30:36] no tenant fit-up investment. The request before you today would make funding the

[30:43] portion of the tenant investment expense required, excuse me, the request before

[30:52] today would fund a portion of the fit of expense required at the West Fargo location.

[30:57] This offset would make, excuse me, this offset makes a retainable at the West Fargo site.

[31:06] This primary sector business collects approximately 12,000 to 15,000 annual sales tax and employs

[31:13] 12 employees currently.

[31:15] The public participation requested today is $275,000, is funded through Economic Development

[31:22] Sales Tax, and is to be used as a forgivable loan over a period of five years.

[31:29] During the conversation with the Economic Development Advisory Committee, the discussion

[31:33] centered around that this is a unique opportunity for sign-basers to present for an industrial

[31:42] space that normally would not collect ideally, excuse me, ideally this space

[31:49] would generate sales tax. Many spaces like this are held for industrial

[31:57] manufacturing and do not collect a sales tax. This factored into the

[32:01] committee's ultimate recommendation for approval to the City Commission.

[32:06] Included in your agenda is a staff report in a summary from the sign

[32:11] and Badgers, as well as design and plans.

[32:14] Dawson from Sign Badgers is here in the audience,

[32:17] and I can certainly invite him up

[32:19] to answer any business-related questions,

[32:21] as well as Nancy from Rusted Properties

[32:24] in which the West Fargo location

[32:27] is the West Fargo locations representation.

[32:31] I'll stand for questions at this time.

[32:33] Questions for Casey?

[32:35] Anyone?

[32:39] Commissioner Drogenson.

[32:41] I guess if he could come to the podium.

[32:43] Good

[32:51] evening. Good evening. Thanks for coming. So with the amount that you're

[32:55] requesting, how much is going into production space and how much is in the

[32:58] office space and how much is out of pocket? I have significant six-figure

[33:02] investment into the business and will into the fit-up as well. And you know

[33:07] it's really hard to sort of draw a line between what's office, what's

[33:11] production in this fit-up portion because what we're doing is subdividing

[33:15] a space. Leaving part of the space essentially open. Yeah, the drawings might help us out

[33:21] here. You know, so that top left corner, if you will, is going to be the office space

[33:28] and the rest is production. So I'd say, you know, if you want to put rough numbers

[33:31] on it, probably 25% of this is dedicated as office space and 75% is production.

[33:36] Do you have any stake in the actual building itself?

[33:39] No.

[33:39] But I just think this is an extreme amount of money for a business that size.

[33:47] I mean, we gave the steel company the same amount for a 90,000 square foot warehouse.

[33:52] And this is being asked for a 5,000 square foot warehouse that brings in one report says

[33:57] 12 to 15, the other one says 15 to 20.

[34:00] I have a tough time with this.

[34:05] Any additional questions?

[34:10] Mr. Zundale.

[34:11] You said you have significant investments in it.

[34:15] How much money are you investing in this fit up?

[34:19] I have a six figure investment in the business.

[34:23] Excuse me if I misspoke.

[34:24] The fit up would be primarily funded with these dollars.

[34:29] And then the landlord is going to kick in some portion of that as well.

[34:33] But my FARGO proposal is zero TI coming in for me.

[34:37] It's actually 375,000 that would come from the developer over there.

[34:41] So this is a bridge that basically gives me, you know, apples to apples.

[34:46] And so I would not have personal investment into the fit up into this space.

[34:50] But, you know, it's also a lease space.

[34:52] And, you know, the alternative is zero dollars investment in the forego side.

[34:58] And then are you expecting sales to increase by increasing your current space as well?

[35:03] Or is the sales tax number that Casey provided?

[35:08] I absolutely see growth in this business and in this vertical. It's part of why I'm taking

[35:12] capital risk to invest in it. We see an active M&A discussions with other regional sign companies.

[35:20] We'd love for West Fargo to be sort of our home and our hub for production going forward.

[35:24] My team would prefer to stay here and it's served us well and they've enjoyed being

[35:30] in the West Fargo community. And so we, as a result of the new space, of course

[35:35] we'll see you know better efficiency and it'll you know have a lot of benefits

[35:39] for our team but you know sort of the broader business strategy will be to

[35:43] grow here and you know ultimately contribute more sales tax to the city

[35:47] of West Fargo. And then I'm going to clarify when you say you'd rather be in

[35:51] West Fargo what makes you rather want to be here than not? You know my team

[35:58] prefers you know working in this community many of them live in this

[36:01] community and you know you know but I have to make a business decision here

[36:07] right and there's a capital incentive for me to go to Fargo you know my team's

[36:11] going to commute to where we go and and you know we're probably going to head

[36:14] to where the capital is.

[36:21] On the overview picture which one of the buildings is

[36:23] it?

[36:28] It's the one that's going up currently so it's actually be in that

[36:32] bottom right hand corner there. Where the dirt is yeah. So there's no building

[36:38] there currently. It's awaiting a floor being poured in it.

[36:44] If I'm not mistaken you're taking up a

[36:46] portion of that building not the full half of it.

[36:52] So this building hasn't been built in just

[36:55] would there be room for you to expand in that building? Yes absolutely you know which is part

[37:00] of what makes it attractive we could push into the other half if we need.

[37:05] Mr. Olson. I was at

[37:08] presentation at the EDAC committee and could you just refresh my memory on what

[37:15] your business, how big a footprint nationwide, I think, where you're out

[37:20] and doing and all that kind of stuff? Yeah, no, I can appreciate that. Thank you.

[37:24] You know, I'm part of a, you know, this is part of a broader set of investments

[37:28] on my part that operate in sort of communications and media space. So I have

[37:32] a company that does traditional and digital media placement, a company that

[37:35] It does direct mail a company that does public opinion research and we work with clients

[37:39] all over the country.

[37:41] This was sort of a strategy first investment on our part.

[37:43] We had those other clients coming to us looking for visual marketing and signage.

[37:47] We couldn't provide that in-house.

[37:49] It's also part of my personal story.

[37:51] My mom started a sign shop in our basement on the farm in northeast North Dakota.

[37:55] So I grew up in a crib watching her hand paint signs.

[37:58] And before that, my great-uncle George was a sign painter in the 1920s.

[38:02] So it's kind of a fun return to this business for me.

[38:05] but you know sign badgers and their excellent team of 12 serves some pretty

[38:10] large companies nationwide. We do most of the interior a fixed signage for all

[38:15] shields locations around the country. RDO has been a long time very committed

[38:19] customer as well. Anytime they open a new dealership around the country we're

[38:23] providing equipment decals things like that. Those are two verticals you know

[38:27] middle market retail and equipment dealers where we see significant

[38:30] growth sort of from Fargo out to the rest of the country so it'll be I think a

[38:36] strong investment for us and

[38:40] so it's fun to back a great team. So keeping your

[38:43] footprint in West Fargo brings the spotlight back on what we can produce

[38:45] here in West Fargo. That was thank you for that. Thank you. I thought I just

[38:53] offer one piece of clarity as I stumbled over this earlier but the

[38:57] intention a lot of the spaces in this area offer a great opportunity for a

[39:02] small business and businesses. The majority of them don't create large

[39:08] amount of jobs. You know, usually you see one or two jobs, maybe three. In addition, you're

[39:14] not going to see production coming out of this area or any amount of sign or any amount

[39:20] of sales tax. I think to that point, when we had this conversation at the EDAC, even

[39:27] even more candid, the conversation was more around an opportunity loss, rather than recognizing

[39:35] this as a significant dollar amount in comparison to maybe some of the other incentives that

[39:40] we've offered.

[39:41] And so I just wanted to kind of share some of that candid feedback.

[39:46] Mr. Zondale.

[39:48] When you talk about some of the loan forgiveness pieces of it, I feel like basically you just

[39:54] have completions of operations.

[39:57] Did you?

[39:58] like I know I guess I feel like part of our discussion also centered around job

[40:03] retention and like continued commitment is there anything other than they just

[40:07] have to have the doors open or when you say forgivable loan what are your

[40:12] markers because they seem very vague in this. Sure that's something you can

[40:16] certainly add anytime we have an incentive we also work with our city

[40:20] attorney to create a business incentive agreement so that's something we can

[40:24] add around job retention numbers. I don't have anything specific outlined in this

[40:29] proposal for job retention numbers, something we could talk about. In addition,

[40:35] I would say the other kind of aspect that we look at is this space. Once fit

[40:43] up, let's say sign petters eventually expand to the point where this space is

[40:48] no longer feasible for them. This space and the fit up in those dollars

[40:52] will remain here in West Fargo. It's not going into equipment. It's not going into vehicles

[40:57] or items that would leave the community that fit up would remain and be able to be reused

[41:02] by an additional future tenant. And so that acts much like the enterprise grant does

[41:09] in our downtown space. And so that's where kind of the model around this discussion

[41:13] has come from.

[41:15] If I may too. I think in the discussion at EDAC we did sort of put up or discussed

[41:19] a forgiveness clock so you know X amount every year for five years on a

[41:24] lease term which certainly is something that we would very much understand and

[41:27] be amenable to. Yeah I see just like two kind of chunks and then what happens if

[41:34] the business isn't successful so they don't complete the 2.5 years of

[41:38] operations that you have chunked out at each of the different sections. That's

[41:43] something that we'd have to work with our city attorney to create a specific

[41:46] clawback and those can be challenging. So I recognize that our

[41:52] clawback is ever

[41:53] successful really in these circumstances. I mean it is a tough position because

[41:58] you're going into it with the business and then the business fails probably right

[42:01] and so then you're in that position where you're trying to recoup the

[42:04] dollars that you invested. So it's a tough spot for the city. Would it

[42:08] transfer ownership so if someone bought outside banners for example would the

[42:16] part of the forgive forgivable loans stay with the business regardless of

[42:21] loans it. I would lean on our city attorney to answer that question. No we

[42:26] can certainly draft it that way. Yeah I think it would be essentially booked as

[42:29] a liability in the entity.

[42:34] I guess I just see this is a lot of money to fit

[42:36] up a building. I don't see it. I've done commercial projects. I don't see

[42:41] putting these walls, bathrooms and stuff in, cost me $275 dollars. I can

[42:47] appreciate that. I didn't think it would either. Have you gotten quotes or bids?

[42:52] That's what supports the number.

[42:58] Additional questions.

[43:04] This is an

[43:04] actionable item, Commissioner. Will we approve the proposed business incentive?

[43:10] Commissioner Olson moves to approve. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Zundow

[43:14] seconds. We have a motion and a second to approve the

[43:18] business incentive request by sign badgers as presented by Casey Sanders

[43:24] in this evening.

[43:26] Is there any discussion?

[43:29] Any discussion?

[43:31] All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[43:34] Aye.

[43:35] Opposed?

[43:36] Nay.

[43:38] With the record show at support of one vote, the motion passes.

[43:41] Thank you.

[43:42] Thank you.

[43:43] We move on to item number five, the final 2026 City of West Fargo budget presentation.

[43:49] We call on Mr. Dustin Scott, City Administrator for the City of West Fargo, and Mr. Willie

[43:54] Galindo director of finance, the city budget. Mr. Scott, good evening and welcome.

[44:01] Thank you, Commission President Dardis and commissioners. I'm honored and

[44:05] privileged to have the opportunity to introduce our 2026 final budget for your

[44:10] consideration tonight. A memo is available in our agenda packet. That

[44:16] memo by the way was updated a little bit this afternoon, specifically adding a

[44:21] section regarding the property taxes and the full budget document is available on our website.

[44:28] I'll give a brief overview of the memo that you have before you and the budget and then

[44:33] I'll call on Willie to walk through some of the numbers.

[44:37] But before I do that, I want to start with some acknowledgments.

[44:41] I want to extend my sincere appreciation to those who've helped lead this effort

[44:46] and shape this budget to where we are today.

[44:49] Starting with Nick and Willie, their first time managing the budget process, and I think

[44:58] they did a phenomenal job.

[45:00] Bringing efficiency, structure, and integrity throughout the budget and the process in general.

[45:06] And of course, Sheila and the rest of the budget team for their hard work and diligence, getting everything in order.

[45:14] Also, I'd like to thank Rachel Lordman.

[45:18] As usual, she's the one bringing everything together for public consumption, and I think she's done a fantastic job with the 26 budget book.

[45:25] If you've not had an opportunity yet, please go through it.

[45:28] I feel like it is very user-friendly, easy to follow, and well put together, so thank you, Rachel.

[45:37] Of course, our department heads and staff who've approached this year's budget cycle with discipline

[45:43] and teamwork finding over $3 million worth of reductions to their initial requests

[45:50] while maintaining a focus and protecting our services that our residents deserve.

[45:59] City Commissioners, we thank you for your active participation throughout and all of your guidance

[46:06] has been greatly appreciated and of course has played a significant role in achieving the 2026

[46:12] budget. And finally to our residents we thank you for staying engaged and entrusting us to

[46:18] serve you.

[46:21] So with that I'll walk through a few highlights before I turn it over to Willie.

[46:24] Firstly, the budget pauses all new FTE requests while supporting the retention of our existing

[46:35] staff through a 2.5 percent COLA and competitive benefits.

[46:41] The general fund is balanced without the use of reserves.

[46:48] I want to point out that there are a few funds that appear to have deficits like our

[46:58] There is cash on hand to fund the projects that have already been approved by the City

[47:03] Commission.

[47:04] And you heard some of that discussion with the audit report.

[47:08] So while the capital sales tax fund, for example, has a 10 or 11 million dollar deficit,

[47:16] that's going to be supplemented through the cash on hand.

[47:20] And again, those projects have all been before the Commission and approved or will

[47:24] be coming before the Commission for approval.

[47:26] We've

[47:31] continued to improve our transparency.

[47:33] The budget book includes departmental overviews, priority statements, and an itemized appendices

[47:39] that contains all of the detail for each department.

[47:47] Here is the new section that was added this afternoon.

[47:53] In accordance with new state law, the 2026 budget includes a 5.4 percent increase in

[47:58] property tax revenue.

[48:00] So that includes the 3 percent cap, along with the new growth that is also allowed

[48:05] by that new state law.

[48:11] Revenue from property taxes support our general fund, library fund,

[48:16] municipal library, and our share of special assessments. The allocation of property tax

[48:22] revenues are based on departmental budget needs.

[48:28] So that's a high-level overview of

[48:31] our budget, but I'm going to call Willie up to talk through the changes that have

[48:36] been made since we last presented on September 8th, as well as go through the numbers

[48:40] that are available in that summary of funds table at the back of this memo.

[48:53] Good evening, commissioners.

[48:55] Let's go down to...

[49:03] Before I go over the summary of the schedule that you see before you,

[49:06] there are a few changes that were made since we last met

[49:10] during September 8th public hearing and the budget draft.

[49:15] One of them being we have a TIF district, San Hills,

[49:19] which was not included in the debt service fund listing and is now included as well.

[49:27] This is a new fund for 2024 and we have additional revenues totaling 34,100 that is estimated for next year

[49:37] and brings the total debt service fund revenue to $23,602,972.

[49:45] The second item is the revenue for the lights plaza and the parking ramp for Cheyenne was

[49:55] adjusted. That revenue went from $528,500 to $536,200 to account for a transfer to our

[50:06] parking ramp fund to match the expenditures as it had a small deficit of $7700.

[50:16] Starting

[50:17] from the top. We're looking at the governmental funds. No change has been

[50:21] made there since the final draft was presented back in September the 8th.

[50:27] General

[50:30] funds including library, municipal airport and sheriff's specials

[50:36] have not been adjusted.

[50:40] Next up is the enterprise funds or the utility funds.

[50:44] Those comprised primarily of the utility fee revenue and these funds

[50:49] have a surplus forecasted in 2026, which will be funds used for strategic reserves.

[51:01] After that, we have the sales tax that our city administrator was discussing.

[51:08] Those are primarily made up of the sales tax portions between public safety,

[51:12] capital improvement sales tax, and economic development sales tax.

[51:18] early there are revenues for 2026 are being displayed here as our city administrator discussed

[51:24] earlier that cash balances or an accounting we call fund balances are utilized to offset

[51:33] the additional expenditures for the 2026 year.

[51:40] After that we have what we call agencies.

[51:42] now we call them custodial funds. These are funds that the city has no direct

[51:48] oversight or governmental control over and they're considered normally a

[51:54] pastor which is why whatever comes in normally comes out so that's neutral.

[52:02] Then

[52:02] we have our special funds that include all the other special revenue funds

[52:07] that the city has which include the state aid such as the Prairie Dog

[52:12] funds. The city-owned plazas that we discussed a little earlier, the Cheyenne and other special

[52:21] circumstances as well. The gaming fund has a $150,000 deficit because there is a fund

[52:32] balance that stems from gaming grant funds that appear to have started back in 1983

[52:39] when the state was providing these grant funds to cities that were non-oil generating cities.

[52:50] After that we have the debt service funds and these funds are used to pay down the debt of

[52:56] the city and they also show a small deficit as we have proceeds from previous years revenues

[53:06] that have accumulated, whether from special assessments or other forms of proceeds.

[53:15] And that concludes my section regarding the summary of the revenues and expenditures for the City of West Fargo.

[53:23] And I stand in front of you to answer any questions you may have.

[53:26] Commissioner Zondale.

[53:28] Could you walk through the gaming fund again?

[53:31] Yes.

[53:31] Yes. So the gaming fund is the revenues are made up of the taxes collected by the state

[53:41] and they provide these grant funds over to these various cities. We're included in that.

[53:47] In addition to that, we also get the fees that we charge for gaming permits. And what

[53:53] we're using these funds for is the administration of those charitable permits.

[54:00] So you're looping it back into the general fund, essentially?

[54:03] Correct.

[54:04] So previously, every all the expenditures that come from the salaries of these employees

[54:09] are hitting the general fund initially.

[54:12] Do you have any idea what the fund balance is of the gaming fund after we deficit out

[54:17] 135,000?

[54:19] It's estimated to still have a small sum.

[54:23] I think it was about $10,000.

[54:24] hours and we're looking to see if they start to build up again at the end of

[54:27] this year and next year then we may consider moving those and transferring

[54:32] back to General Fund as well. Okay and then just a point of clarification so I

[54:38] understand as far as the property tax cap does that affect the library and the

[54:45] airport? It does because it's part of the overall tax so it is part of the

[54:52] cap, the only one that is not considered, part of the cap is the share of specials.

[54:57] So did they individually cap at the retrospective 5% in that budget, or did you lump them all

[55:05] together minus the share of specials to get to a cumulative 5 point, I think you said

[55:11] 26, Dustin?

[55:13] Yeah.

[55:13] I see Dustin wants to come up here.

[55:15] You're doing fine.

[55:16] Okay.

[55:18] I don't know.

[55:18] He's lurking in.

[55:19] He's looking like he's ready.

[55:22] I can speak on behalf of the airport fund that went up higher because now we're selling the gas.

[55:28] So we're taking the revenue to cover the expenditure.

[55:31] Right. I'm just wondering how that looped in, how we're basically treating the different mill,

[55:37] or how we treated the milled entities different when they had different ones in that.

[55:41] Right. The number we do is we oversee the overall taxes.

[55:45] So technically it would be the general library and municipal airport combined

[55:49] based on 2025's figures. From there we move on to add the new growth component to

[55:57] it which includes the actual new growth to the city as well as this year we had

[56:03] a TIF district that closed down so that created another benefit which is

[56:08] considered new growth under the state law. Once we added those and calculated

[56:14] the new growth in value, the dollars associated with that, we added that to the 2025 base year

[56:21] and then we took the 3% of that. So the cap is included of municipal and airport and library.

[56:27] I think what I'm trying to understand is if they capped each individual budget

[56:31] or if you did a lump sum of all the money and then everyone had to work within those confines.

[56:37] Does that question make sense?

[56:38] Yes. So I would say it's the latter portion of that where it's a combined dollar amount

[56:43] and basically we look forward to see which fund sources are needed in each of the in each of the

[56:52] seconds.

[56:59] I'll just build on what Willie's saying there and it's actually included in the memo here.

[57:12] So the revenue from our property taxes is calculated as a lump sum over that just property

[57:22] tax revenue, that revenue goes into our general fund, it goes into the library, the airport,

[57:32] as well as a share of special assessments.

[57:35] The amount that we are apportioning to those funds are dependent upon their budget needs.

[57:42] So the 3% cap does not cap any individual fund's budget, if you will.

[57:47] So think of the property taxes as one of our revenue streams, which is less than 50, yep.

[57:53] So of that total revenue stream, when we calculated out the 3% cap and then added in the new growth,

[58:01] all of that led to a total dollar amount, 22 plus or minus million dollars.

[58:05] Of that, we took and then set a portion to each of those funds based on their

[58:14] departmental needs or their fund needs.

[58:16] So my only question with that as we're voting on this is I just want to ensure I

[58:21] worry a little bit with this 3% because for example, they have different

[58:26] boards that approve budgets and

[58:30] We're obviously the overall approving of what those are considering, but if they're all lumped in I

[58:38] Think I'm maybe in Katie perhaps I can ask you that is how do we

[58:43] They're two separate boards and they're sort of government entities.

[58:46] They're not taking their cap, but it counts as our cap because it's all out of the same

[58:51] fund.

[58:51] Right, because the city collects it.

[58:53] Okay.

[58:54] And maybe to think of it this way, those boards are charged with overseeing their

[58:59] expense budgets.

[59:01] The city establishes their revenue stream through an allotment of not just property tax

[59:08] revenue, but other stuff.

[59:09] So, again, think of those boards as governing their operational expenses.

[59:16] Okay.

[59:20] For the record on your memorandum, we don't have the updated one.

[59:27] We do not have anything about your property tax calculations in the document that I have

[59:34] or the commissioners have just for the record.

[59:38] Just to clarify that, are you looking at a printed copy or what you see on the screen here?

[59:42] What I see on the screen in our printed copy does not have number two property tax calculations.

[59:48] Right. That was added this afternoon after our discussion this morning.

[59:52] But that's the most important discussion item with regard to Commissioner Zondale's question.

[1:00:01] So it has been added to the agenda packet that is available online. If you would like to do printed version, we can certainly do that, and the information is available.

[1:00:16] So just let us know if you need more or less.

[1:00:21] Any other questions, commissioners?

[1:00:23] Commissioner, you're awesome.

[1:00:24] Can you just give me the high overview of,

[1:00:29] if you go to your attachment to where it shows our revenues is $123.7 million

[1:00:35] and our expenses are $134.2 million, so that's a deficit of $10.5 million.

[1:00:43] So explain how that all works and we still have a balanced budget.

[1:00:47] Okay, yep, so that's where my initial opening remark I was

[1:00:52] indicating that while we will have some of these funds in deficit, there are existing cash balances.

[1:00:59] So for example, the capital sales tax balance, and I don't know the number off the top of my head,

[1:01:04] but it is flush enough to afford the projects that we are expending in 26.

[1:01:11] I believe John alluded to it during the audit report that these capital funds get to be an awkward timing thing

[1:01:18] of when are you approving the projects, completing the work, and writing the checks.

[1:01:23] And so they don't necessarily always align with your budgeting schedules.

[1:01:28] So in the budget, we're focused on what is the annual collection and what is the annual

[1:01:34] expense.

[1:01:35] So for example, the annual revenue for 26 is there, but the expense is twice as

[1:01:42] much because we've already committed to those projects.

[1:01:47] projects. And we've committed knowing that we have enough cash on hand to afford those

[1:01:53] projects. Now, what Willie does in collaboration with the engineering team is they take a look

[1:01:59] at a five-year projection. What are the projects we're going to do? What are the monies used

[1:02:05] to fund those projects? And can we move forward with them? So, but yes, when you

[1:02:10] look at and see that there's a deficit, it's because this budget is not accounting

[1:02:14] for the cash that was already encumbered to finance those projects, if that's making

[1:02:19] sense.

[1:02:20] I want the public to hear that.

[1:02:21] Yep.

[1:02:22] Where you can find that information is on our monthly financial reports, which you would

[1:02:27] have seen in the agenda packet, the financial report through July and the financial report

[1:02:32] through August.

[1:02:33] You'll see cash balances there.

[1:02:35] Thank you.

[1:02:37] And I do have a couple closing remarks if you don't have any other questions.

[1:02:45] So

[1:02:47] I just want to go back to in the memo here. There are next steps identified. So the first one being tonight's meeting, of course, you have the opportunity or option to approve the budget, either as presented or with changes.

[1:03:07] You could direct staff to continue to work on the budget and hold either a special meeting

[1:03:15] or bring it forward to your next regular meeting on October 6th.

[1:03:19] But the final budget is due to the county by October 10th.

[1:03:24] So again, those are your options in moving forward with approving the final budget.

[1:03:30] But once the budget is approved, then of course we turn that over to the county.

[1:03:36] We will make sure everything is published on our website and publicly available.

[1:03:41] And then finally, residents will receive their preliminary tax statements or their tax statements

[1:03:46] in December.

[1:03:46] The county will distribute those in December.

[1:03:48] So one of the legislative changes that we all know occurred is the county was not

[1:03:56] required to send out preliminary tax statements this summer.

[1:03:59] so that will be delayed until December so those are the next steps and again

[1:04:07] Willie and I are available for for any questions any

[1:04:14] additional questions I

[1:04:18] move

[1:04:19] we approve the 2026 budget as presented commissioners endow moves to

[1:04:23] approve the 2026 city of West Fargo budget is there a second second

[1:04:31] Commissioner Olsen seconds. I have a motion and a second to approve the final

[1:04:36] 2026 City of West Fargo budget as presented this evening. Is there any

[1:04:42] discussion?

[1:04:49] Hearing none all those in favor please signify by saying aye. Opposed?

[1:04:55] Motion carried. Thank you again gentlemen. Item number six is a 25-16

[1:05:03] Bogey 4th edition. Request for access to an arterial street. We're going to call on Mr.

[1:05:10] Aaron Nelson, Director of Planning and Zoning for the City of West Fargo. Good evening and

[1:05:14] welcome Mr. Nelson. Good evening President, Artists and Commissioners. So item 6 is a request

[1:05:20] for approval of full access of a driveway onto an arterial roadway along with associated

[1:05:25] access agreement. This item does come to you with recommendation for approval from

[1:05:29] in the Planning and Zoning Commission.

[1:05:32] So we'll just start with the aerial map here.

[1:05:34] The subject property is located at 475 12th Avenue

[1:05:38] Northeast, which is the site of the Hazer's self-service

[1:05:41] auto parts salvage, excuse me, salvage yard.

[1:05:45] Yep, it currently has a right in, right out driveway

[1:05:47] access point onto 12th Avenue on the north end

[1:05:49] of their property here.

[1:05:51] Scroll down a little bit to another graphic

[1:05:54] in your packet here.

[1:05:56] Full access is currently restricted due to the presence

[1:05:59] of a raised concrete median within the center of 12th Avenue northeast that extends approximately

[1:06:04] 350 feet east of the adjacent railroad tracks which are located just to the west here. The applicant

[1:06:10] is requesting removal of the raised concrete median at this location in order to allow full access

[1:06:14] into their property. This request has been reviewed by the engineering staff and in

[1:06:20] contact with the original consultant design team that did the design work for this portion

[1:06:24] 12th Avenue. The access point in question is approximately 350 feet from the nearest driveway

[1:06:30] or intersection, which does meet our minimum standards for driveway and access spacing of

[1:06:35] our subdivision ordinance. And while staff does not have any concerns with the removal of the

[1:06:41] median at this location, future traffic volumes and conditions may warrant

[1:06:46] reinstallation of a raised median at some point in the future if and when

[1:06:50] traffic volumes increase along 12th Avenue. As such, staff recommends that the

[1:06:55] approval of the applicant's request be conditioned on the applicant's waiver of

[1:06:58] a right to protest any future decision by the city to reinstall the raised

[1:07:02] median and or to otherwise restrict access if conditions warrant, as well as

[1:07:06] the applicant's waiver of the right to protest any costs for such improvements

[1:07:09] that may be assessed in accordance with the city's infrastructure funding

[1:07:13] policy. Costs associated with the proposed removal of the median will

[1:07:18] be the responsibility of the applicant and at least 100 feet of the raised

[1:07:22] median will remain just to the east of the railroad crossing there. So with

[1:07:29] that overview, request action tonight again is to approve the request for full

[1:07:33] access on 12th Avenue at this location with the conditions noted in the staff

[1:07:36] report and to approve the associated access agreement which documents

[1:07:40] those conditions. So with that, happy to answer any questions you have for staff.

[1:07:47] I'm going to ask the question on everybody's mind.

[1:07:51] Tell me why this is different than the ongoing argument with the Shea West location.

[1:07:56] Yeah.

[1:07:56] So the main difference here is there's just adequate spacing between other driveway and

[1:08:01] intersection points.

[1:08:03] Shea West is a little different and that is in proximity to a major intersection with

[1:08:08] the traffic control traffic light.

[1:08:11] and the queues required for that traffic light encroached into the area that

[1:08:16] Chi West would be requesting for their full access.

[1:08:17] None of that here. There's no traffic DOT regulation, no nothing like that to deny a request and the applicant is paying for it.

[1:08:25] Correct, yep. Just different context, yep.

[1:08:28] Thank you.

[1:08:29] With that being said, why was it placed there in the first place then?

[1:08:34] So that one I'll probably defer to Mr. Hansen if that's the right order.

[1:08:38] Mr. Wallace.

[1:08:42] Thank you, Commissioner, present artists and commissioners. We did do some research. I obviously

[1:08:47] wasn't around when this was originally constructed. And I had the same question as well because on

[1:08:52] the west side of the tracks, the median sticks out about 100 feet. On the east side of the tracks,

[1:08:57] it sticks out about approximately 340, 350 feet. So why so long on the east side?

[1:09:02] I thought maybe that might be a quiet zone for the railroad, something like that.

[1:09:06] found out that it was not a railroad requirement. It's my belief that at the

[1:09:11] time it was installed to restrict open access into that property. But a couple

[1:09:19] of the things that engineering has looked over in this new request is that

[1:09:25] there are people that are traveling westbound and they're making U-turns

[1:09:30] in the railroad track and beyond the railroad track right now. We recently

[1:09:34] only had a pickup. That was a train hit it, basically. Luckily, the person that was driving

[1:09:40] the pickup survived. But it is a safety issue. And also, as Erin described, we don't have

[1:09:48] any current rules against letting us allow this. But we did want to take a look as the

[1:09:54] future, once the diversion is done and we've got thousands of acres of a developable

[1:09:58] land that could produce eventual traffic on here that might want us to restrict

[1:10:02] the access again in the future. Right now the traffic patterns don't suggest to us that

[1:10:09] we can't allow this accommodation as long as we are reserving the right to recreate

[1:10:14] the accommodation in the event that the traffic levels do increase with future growth of

[1:10:19] the city.

[1:10:19] So the removal of this, is that the expense of the owner?

[1:10:24] Yep, they would have to take out a permit from us and do it as a private job with

[1:10:29] a licensed contractor and good standing with the city.

[1:10:32] And the future, if the traffic increases and it has to go back in there at whose expense?

[1:10:39] That would be, at the time, it would be a public improvement project that we would do when

[1:10:44] we would run it through our standard assessment procedures that we would normally do so.

[1:10:48] I think we're talking years and years in the future and as far as the amount of cost

[1:10:55] for extending a median, it's fairly negligible in the overall thing, but it would be able

[1:11:01] to be assessed at a, in our current rate, we would assess it at 70%.

[1:11:06] That being said, to remove it and then the possibility

[1:11:09] that we're going to a special assessed

[1:11:11] and pay for it makes absolutely no sense.

[1:11:14] This should not be approved, in my opinion.

[1:11:17] Mr. Olsen.

[1:11:18] Thank you.

[1:11:19] There was a comment made that this would be a full, full access.

[1:11:23] Will they be able to make a left out?

[1:11:26] Or are they still only doing a right out?

[1:11:28] No.

[1:11:29] Yeah, it would be a full access.

[1:11:31] full access to Mr. Anderson to that point the question I had was do we know if

[1:11:38] there's many trucks or vehicles taking a left to go west that would need to go

[1:11:43] west out of there or is the need coming from westbound traffic turning left

[1:11:48] into the driveway and then they would write out yeah talking with the owner

[1:11:52] the vast majority of the traffic are as far as truck traffic is it they're

[1:11:56] coming from the east they want to take a left into the lot and then

[1:12:00] when they leave their intent for the vast majority of those trucks would be

[1:12:06] to take a right and head off to the east again.

[1:12:09] Okay, thank you.

[1:12:12] Any other questions, Commissioners?

[1:12:15] So could we just make it a three-quarter?

[1:12:18] There's no room for a three-quarter. There's not enough room in the

[1:12:22] median to make a three-quarter because you have to have enough room to

[1:12:27] provide. If you look at a three-quarter when they're turning they

[1:12:31] have to stop at an angle. There isn't enough room for that, whereas there is enough room

[1:12:35] to just extend that center turn lane, that shared turn lane that's in the center. That

[1:12:40] can be extended at the current standard width for there to be a queuing allowed and they

[1:12:48] can make a turn into it from that center turn.

[1:12:53] Well, there's enough room to make a full access where they can make a left out,

[1:12:58] but we can't just make it so that it's only a left in coming from the east.

[1:13:03] Right, it doesn't seem like it makes sense, but when you're having to put enough concrete in there

[1:13:10] so that you can get a skewed vehicle to stop in the middle of some turning lanes

[1:13:14] as opposed to having them just stop facing directly to the west,

[1:13:18] you need more room in the median for that skewed stopping maneuver.

[1:13:28] Are there any discussions about them being responsible if we have to have it closed again

[1:13:35] for the cost?

[1:13:36] Like I understand they're going to be responsible for the cost to remove it, but should it warrant

[1:13:40] to have it closed again, was there any discussion or do you think the applicant would be agreeable

[1:13:46] to covering that cost?

[1:13:47] So the intent of being put into the agreement is that they're waiving any rights to

[1:13:54] the amount of assessments that we would assess against that property in the event that we

[1:13:59] do close it. At the time of that project, benefit would be determined as to who's benefiting

[1:14:05] and who's not from that. And then assessments would be basically levied against whatever

[1:14:11] property they're benefiting at the time of that assessment in the future. So there

[1:14:17] isn't any clause that says, okay, we'll let you pay to open it, but if we ever

[1:14:21] want to close it. You have to pay 100% for the closure. That is not in the

[1:14:26] agreement. I guess my question would be from their perspective is that I mean

[1:14:31] that would be the opposite of a benefit. If they're asking us to open it

[1:14:36] because that's going to benefit them closing it, I'm not sure and maybe

[1:14:40] that's different in special assessment words or whatever, but I would say it's

[1:14:43] the opposite of a benefit. So typically for street projects the the benefit is

[1:14:51] this absolutely could be argued at the time I'm not benefiting from this. However, a lot

[1:14:56] of times when you're talking street improvement projects, the benefit for any

[1:15:00] Any local or regional or, you know, arterial street project, when that is done, it is assessed

[1:15:06] at a front footage basis to everybody that abuts the project because the benefits of improving

[1:15:11] traffic circulation on collector roadways is a benefit to all that are adjacent to it.

[1:15:19] So there's intrinsic benefit in improving the maneuvering of traffic on the roadway.

[1:15:26] Now, again, yeah, I agree 100%.

[1:15:28] The current owner at the time,

[1:15:30] because it might not even be these people.

[1:15:31] This might be 20 years in the future or longer.

[1:15:35] They might be, and I would assume they probably would be

[1:15:38] at a commission meeting saying,

[1:15:40] how is this any benefit to me?

[1:15:41] I don't want this to close.

[1:15:43] This is gonna, and you can create all the arguments

[1:15:45] you can think of, but we are putting in there

[1:15:49] that at the time, whatever assessment is deemed

[1:15:52] to be a benefit to their property,

[1:15:55] They would not have the right to contest that so my question would be does that transfer to owners?

[1:16:00] Like if they sell their property to somebody else someone else now owns the subject property

[1:16:05] We do a whatever we deem they have to close it can those people

[1:16:09] I mean I would presume they would have the ability to protest because they're not the ones who signed this agreement

[1:16:14] Okay, I believe that this stays with the property and I would look at the city attorney

[1:16:17] But she's shaking her head and affirmative as well for that. I think the intent was to record it

[1:16:21] that so that it would be binding on future owners.

[1:16:27] Thank you, Mr. Schmidt.

[1:16:29] Commissioner Olson and then Commissioner Bergen to come to the floor.

[1:16:32] Dan, can you move your slides to the number four, slide four?

[1:16:37] I'll go the other way.

[1:16:40] Keep going.

[1:16:42] Right there.

[1:16:44] What is preventing their customers from coming in and having access at 11th Avenue northeast

[1:16:50] versus coming in on 12th Avenue?

[1:16:54] They can have full access right there, you know, wouldn't affect the Ray Road or anything up there.

[1:17:01] That's a good argument. 11th Avenue is more of a local roadway as opposed to the 12th Avenue when it would be, you know, trucks and things of that nature that are coming to access their parcel going through that local roadway.

[1:17:16] However, it is City Street, so it is public right away.

[1:17:21] Is it constructed so it could hold?

[1:17:23] but yet everything out there is constructed as a industrial section. Mr.

[1:17:31] Jorgensen. I just see it as a bottleneck to put that to give them access in

[1:17:36] there because the truck bypass lane is just barely starting there won't be

[1:17:41] enough room to fully gain access to the bypass lane. So the intent would be

[1:17:47] that where the median occupies that space the median would be removed

[1:17:51] creating a shared center turn lane that has allowed plenty of queuing especially

[1:17:59] since an average daily traffic to the site is you know 10 15 vehicles something

[1:18:07] like that. We're not talking that this is a major thoroughfare to get in and

[1:18:13] out of there. So with the amount of traffic that are that's going in there

[1:18:17] and that the bypass lane is not in assistance or to the detriment of what

[1:18:29] we're talking about here today because the center turn lane would be able to

[1:18:32] handle what we're what we're talking about. It's too bad this work wasn't done

[1:18:36] in the spring before we redid on that whole road with

[1:18:41] all of them. Yeah and from

[1:18:43] what I under what I can gather is that the median was and intentionally when

[1:18:48] the roadway was constructed. I believe there was talking to the design team,

[1:18:53] there was talk with the current public works staff and everything as far as

[1:18:58] the design of the road. It was chosen to do that. Again, I'm not 100% certain

[1:19:03] exactly why, but my guess would be it would be to have restricted access to

[1:19:09] that site would be my guess. But again, what we're seeing is there's, there

[1:19:15] illegal and dangerous turning movements that are occurring because it is restricted.

[1:19:22] And there are trucks headed west that need to go into there and there isn't a natural

[1:19:27] U-turn for a truck off to the west unless you go around away.

[1:19:33] So that's why engineering is, we don't see a reason why at this point it should be

[1:19:42] flat out red flag denied and we don't see a detriment to allowing it at this

[1:19:48] point along with the contingency that we have the right to put it back this way

[1:19:53] someday when the population of West Fargo increases and traffic levels

[1:19:57] increase. Who's the neighbor to the right?

[1:20:11] I believe that's Midland

[1:20:12] full access that has the exact same situation we're creating here. Thank you.

[1:20:20] Commissioner Zondale? Would it be possible to amend the agreement to say if we

[1:20:23] had to pull it back, put it back, they would be responsible for 100% of the

[1:20:26] cost? Yeah we could make that amendment. I don't know that the landowner will be

[1:20:31] open to it or not. I know there was a lot of discussion back and forth with him.

[1:20:35] We originally, I believe, were starting from that point and they argued

[1:20:40] that we should pay our fair share but not be not being able to put the

[1:20:44] name in writing that a future owner at the best of the city with regardless of

[1:20:50] whatever we want they just have to pay a hundred percent of it without being

[1:20:53] able to go through a special assessment procedure. But it sounds like the

[1:20:57] special assessment procedure they can't go through anyways under the concept of

[1:21:01] they can't protest the special assessment. So they're already kind of

[1:21:04] signing away the rights of the property owner to protest it anyways. I

[1:21:10] I don't think it's fair to expend any money

[1:21:13] from a city budget to basically benefit this sole property.

[1:21:20] So I can understand the concept of wanting to do it

[1:21:22] and it not being a problem under any other

[1:21:25] regulation standards, there's no reason not to do it.

[1:21:28] I just don't know that it's fair to commit

[1:21:32] additional funds because we undid it

[1:21:34] for one property to redo it.

[1:21:37] So,

[1:21:40] I guess I would personally make the motion to approve it under the premise that they're

[1:21:45] going to pay 100% of it if that's to go back of just that portion, whatever the cost of

[1:21:50] returning the median to be what it would be if anybody has an appetite for that.

[1:22:00] Got a motion?

[1:22:01] Sure.

[1:22:02] I have a motion.

[1:22:03] Is there a second?

[1:22:04] I'll second that.

[1:22:05] Commissioner Anderson seconds.

[1:22:06] It's been a motion in the second to approve a 25-16 Bogey 4th edition with amended language

[1:22:16] that the property owner would have to pay 100% if it to reconstruct.

[1:22:20] That about it?

[1:22:22] That right?

[1:22:24] Any further discussion?

[1:22:30] Hearing none, all those in favor please signify by saying aye.

[1:22:33] Aye.

[1:22:36] Opposed?

[1:22:37] Nay.

[1:22:38] Motion passes three to two.

[1:22:44] Item number seven.

[1:22:45] and there's a second reading of A25-17,

[1:22:48] Cheyenne's second edition, a request for rezoning

[1:22:51] from R2 to P.

[1:22:54] Again, we call on Erin Nelson,

[1:22:56] Director of Planning and Zoning.

[1:22:58] Thank you.

[1:23:01] So item seven is an application to rezone

[1:23:03] the South Elementary School property from R2,

[1:23:06] multi-dwelling residential to P public facilities.

[1:23:09] A specific request to action today

[1:23:11] is to approve the second reading

[1:23:12] of the rezoning ordinance.

[1:23:14] The first reading of the ordinance was approved by the City Commission at your last regular

[1:23:18] meeting back on September 8th, at which time a public hearing was held.

[1:23:22] There have been no changes or updates to the request since it was presented to the Commission

[1:23:26] on September 8th.

[1:23:28] So unless there are additional questions for staff, again, the requested action tonight

[1:23:32] is to approve the second reading of the Rezone Ordinance.

[1:23:35] I motion to approve.

[1:23:37] Thank you, Commissioner Dorgon.

[1:23:38] So now I have a motion to approve, is there a second?

[1:23:40] Second.

[1:23:41] Commissioner Olson seconds.

[1:23:43] we have a motion and a second to approve the second reading 825-17 Cheyenne

[1:23:48] second edition of requests from zoning from R2 to public land.

[1:23:54] Is there any

[1:23:54] discussion? Hearing none all those in favor please signify by saying aye. Opposed?

[1:24:01] Motion carried. Thank you. Item number eight is 825-12 FMD

[1:24:08] Mapleton subdivision request for a final Platt approval. Erin Nelson

[1:24:12] Director of Planning and Zoning.

[1:24:16] Thank you.

[1:24:17] Item 8 is a request for approval of the final plan of FMD-Mapleton Subdivision along with the Associated Subdivision Agreement.

[1:24:25] This request comes to you with a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission.

[1:24:29] In this case, the subject property includes the portion of the FM Diversion Project boundary that is located within

[1:24:34] on Mapleton Township. So this is just west of the current city limits. Approximately south,

[1:24:40] I think, of 12th Avenue Northwest and north of 52nd Avenue West. The primary purpose of

[1:24:49] this subdivision is to establish formal property boundaries for and simplified legal description

[1:24:55] for the FM diversion right away. The project is being platted one township at a time

[1:25:01] starting from the north and moving south. Some of you may recall a similar type application

[1:25:06] for Raymond Township just the north several months back. The plot is unique in that typical

[1:25:12] plot features such as vacation of unneeded section line roads and dedication of additional

[1:25:18] public rights of way for future streets and utilities are not included in the plot.

[1:25:22] Instead the property is intended to be replatted upon substantial completion of

[1:25:26] and diversion project once the final right-of-way boundaries are known. The

[1:25:33] replat will include the reconfiguration of easements rights-of-way based on the

[1:25:37] final project design as built. Additionally, the rezoning of the property

[1:25:41] is anticipated to take place with the future replat of the property at a date

[1:25:46] to be determined. To ensure the replat takes place, any associated

[1:25:50] subdivision or associated modifications to the rights-of-way are

[1:25:56] are completed. The subdivision agreement basically documents that intent,

[1:26:00] guaranteeing that the FM diversion project will come back and replat the

[1:26:06] property once the project is complete. So with that I'm happy to answer any

[1:26:10] questions you have for staff. Otherwise again the request is action tonight is

[1:26:13] to approve the final plan and the associated agreement.

[1:26:16] Commissioner, do you have any questions?

[1:26:20] We'll be approved.

[1:26:21] Commissioner Olson moves to approve Metro Flood Diversion Mapleton

[1:26:24] subdivision request for a final plot. Is there a second? Second. Mr. Zendal seconds. I have

[1:26:30] a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor

[1:26:35] please signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. Moving on to

[1:26:41] I-9, number nine is 825-13, Metro flood diversion again. It's a worn first

[1:26:47] subdivision request for a final plot approval calling on Aaron Nelson

[1:26:52] and Director of Planning and Zoning.

[1:26:54] Thank you.

[1:26:55] Item nine is a request for approval of the final plan

[1:26:57] of FMD War and First subdivision,

[1:26:59] along with the Associated Subdivision Agreement.

[1:27:02] This one, again, comes with a recommendation

[1:27:04] for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission.

[1:27:07] Essentially, this is the same type of request,

[1:27:10] only instead of Maplewood Township,

[1:27:12] we're looking at Warren Township,

[1:27:14] specifically the section of Warren Township

[1:27:16] that the City of West Fargo exercises

[1:27:19] is extra-territorial zoning jurisdiction.

[1:27:23] So here again, there's an associated subdivision agreement

[1:27:26] that basically documents the unique aspects of this flat

[1:27:30] and talks about the intention to come back

[1:27:33] and replat the property upon completion

[1:27:35] of the FN diversion project.

[1:27:38] So here again, happy to answer any questions

[1:27:40] you have for staff.

[1:27:41] Otherwise it's a same request, different location.

[1:27:45] Motion to approve.

[1:27:46] Mr. Jorgensen moves to approve a 25-13 for the Metro flood diversion worn for

[1:27:52] subdivision. Is there a second? Second. Mr. Anderson seconds. A motion and a

[1:27:57] second. Is there any discussion?

[1:28:00] Hearing none all those in favor please signify by

[1:28:02] saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. Item number 10 2025 sewer

[1:28:09] budget adjustment. We call on Mr. Matt Anvick the director of public

[1:28:15] work City of West Fargo. Good evening and welcome. Good evening, Commissioner, President, Commissioners.

[1:28:20] Tonight I'm asking for an increase or budget adjustment and increase to the chemical line

[1:28:25] item on the sewer department from 150,000 to 350,000. This came about because last

[1:28:32] fall we started getting, they had conversations with Fargo. They were getting some complaints

[1:28:37] about odor and smell that was coming kind of on the north side of town doing some

[1:28:41] testing our H2S levels were quite high at the time, so working with them we started

[1:28:48] trying to take some samples, actually started doing some more odor,

[1:28:58] well losing

[1:28:59] it today, doing some more odor control, doing a little bit more injection to keep

[1:29:06] those those levels down and that's just basically the reason for this

[1:29:10] increase. The H2S causes order issues and just the increased chemical treatment is the cost to

[1:29:19] stay within the limits for that. When we identified this we just decided to bring this forward kind

[1:29:25] of as a formal budget adjustment. This won't change the overall sewer department budget.

[1:29:31] It's just more or less this one line item. Just because of the large dollar figure it would

[1:29:37] look and be something that would really stand out in the budget next year.

[1:29:41] And without coming forward and explaining it in this way and kind of being more transparent

[1:29:45] about coming forward with it now, we probably would have got more questions in the future

[1:29:49] so that we wanted to bring this forward now, explain what was going on and why we need

[1:29:53] to do this.

[1:29:55] So it would be an increase of about $200,000 in that chemical line item.

[1:30:00] Like I said, no change to the overall sort of budget. But what we are looking at is future

[1:30:06] items to try and save this money. The way it is right now, we're about $1,000 a day in chemicals

[1:30:11] to keep that down. So that'll be a quite a significant expense going forward. We're looking

[1:30:16] at some old zone injection stations. That's more of a cost-heavy upfront, but that annually then

[1:30:24] to do that is probably about $10,000 to $15,000. That's kind of somewhat unproven a little bit

[1:30:31] on certain areas. We talked to some other cities that have that and it's worked well

[1:30:36] for them. We're in the middle of doing kind of a testing phase in the next few months

[1:30:40] hopefully, getting a small unit up here for a rental and just to make sure it's kind

[1:30:46] of a proof of concept to make sure that works before we really start looking at

[1:30:50] bringing a large-scale unit in to try and save some of those dollars in chemicals.

[1:30:56] We looked at order corrosion and control study this last year.

[1:31:01] Those studies take about nine months.

[1:31:04] We want to hold off of that until maybe next spring, get a little bit more information

[1:31:08] on the ozone, and then possibly bring that study back before you.

[1:31:13] Since they always, when they're doing that study, they want to see what the levels

[1:31:18] are in the winter when the cooler months ends as well and then come back in the summer months

[1:31:22] when we have the warm weather to test those levels as well.

[1:31:27] So with that, I'll ask for approval to increase the chemical line item from $150,000 to $350,000

[1:31:37] for the 2025 budget and I'll stand for any questions.

[1:31:43] Commissioner Olson.

[1:31:44] Thank you.

[1:31:45] Matt, in your policy analysis, you really don't speak to the odor, but it's more that

[1:31:56] this H2S can lead to corrosion, increased maintenance costs, and all that.

[1:32:01] So that is one of the other things that we need to do, too, right, rather than just

[1:32:06] maintaining the odor for Fargo to treat it.

[1:32:10] Correct.

[1:32:10] it's kind of a two, you know, with the H2S, you actually get some water in there, it turns

[1:32:17] into hydro-sophiric acid, sorry, tripping over that one. And we've spent a lot of money

[1:32:24] in the last few years on some of the capital improvement projects to redo a lot of our

[1:32:30] manholes, lift stations, because of the corrosion that we've seen with the H2S. That's

[1:32:36] we've had three kind of stations before for order control and trying to contain that H2S,

[1:32:42] but we've seen hazard flows of increase, so is the H2S as well. And then the smell has been

[1:32:50] mitigated somewhat in West Fargo, but that long horseman that goes to Fargo, we were starting

[1:32:56] getting some order up around the airport area, kind of North Fargo area, where we need to

[1:33:02] to keep our levels down to as part of the agreement with Fargo.

[1:33:05] Sure.

[1:33:06] Thank you.

[1:33:08] Mr. Jorgensen.

[1:33:10] I applaud you, Matt, when you first brought this to my attention that, I mean, there's

[1:33:14] a problem and you're looking far ahead in the solutions that are much more economical.

[1:33:19] So I applaud you and your team.

[1:33:21] Thank you.

[1:33:22] Mr. Anderson.

[1:33:26] I guess in relation to the budget that we just passed this evening, is this the

[1:33:32] count for for any like future things next year. I know that we're you know

[1:33:37] that you're asking about 25 budget but what impacts would this have to next

[1:33:42] year's budget? We did increase the chemical line item budget. I think it's

[1:33:49] 220,000 I think next year. So it's not quite that amount. What we'd look for is

[1:33:55] if this ozone treatment is what we think it's going to be and what we've

[1:34:00] talked to other counties, then we'd come back.

[1:34:03] That would probably be like a capital one-time purchase

[1:34:05] that I'll bring back through.

[1:34:07] That should keep that budget line item down in this next year.

[1:34:12] Like a 4 million gallon a day ozone generator that

[1:34:15] would go up on our SA-40 site is right around that 250,000

[1:34:19] mark, but that's a one-time purchase.

[1:34:22] And then it's about 10,000 to 15,000 for annual running,

[1:34:27] operating per year after that.

[1:34:29] So, you know, that's a one-time purchase instead of like, you know, $300,000 every year.

[1:34:34] So, hopefully we can mitigate that as a one-time purchase and do that and keep that.

[1:34:38] But that is something we're going to have to monitor as we go forward to see

[1:34:41] if we, how much we're going to have to increase that or decrease that budget in the future.

[1:34:46] Okay.

[1:34:46] Thank you.

[1:34:48] Anything else for Mr. Anvic?

[1:34:54] Mr. Zundal moves to approve the adjustment to the 2025 sewer budget by $200,000.

[1:35:01] Is there a second?

[1:35:03] Second.

[1:35:04] Commissioner Jorgensen seconds.

[1:35:06] We have a motion and a second to approve a sewer budget

[1:35:10] adjustment for 2025 to the tune of $200,000.

[1:35:16] Is there any further discussion?

[1:35:18] Just a point of clarification.

[1:35:21] It's a line item adjustment versus an overall correct sewer

[1:35:27] budget, the budget in the way Matt explained it.

[1:35:29] Good point.

[1:35:30] Thank you.

[1:35:30] Just a line item. We're changing the numbers there, but overall budgets remains the same chemical budget

[1:35:36] Okay, yep. Okay. Thank you

[1:35:40] journey from the discussion

[1:35:43] Hearing none all those in favor, please signify by saying aye opposed motion carried. Thank you, Mr.

[1:35:49] Henry item number 11 is an improvement district number 3009

[1:35:53] It's first Avenue reconstruction Cheyenne Street to 4th Avenue east we call on Mr.

[1:35:59] Mr. Dan Hansen, the director of community development, purpose of the discussions to

[1:36:03] approve the engineers report and direct the engineer to prepare plans and specifications.

[1:36:08] Mr. Hansen, welcome back.

[1:36:10] Thank you, Commissioner President Dardes and commissioners.

[1:36:13] As stated, this is a project that is back in front of you.

[1:36:16] The commission in June directed the engineer to prepare an engineers report.

[1:36:22] We did have a consultant put together a feasibility study that was used to complete

[1:36:27] this engineers report and up on the screen what you have in front of you is the proposed

[1:36:32] improvements that are being recommended to move forward with this project.

[1:36:37] One thing that I would point out is on the original, this project was in the 2024 CIP,

[1:36:43] it was originally slated to be replacing this or removing this lift station and installing the

[1:36:50] sanitary sewer over to second where we can connect it up to existing gravity.

[1:36:55] In doing so, we also have in that section, we've got cast iron, water main, and asbestos

[1:37:02] concrete pipe, ACP pipe, both well beyond their serviceable life and in need of replacement.

[1:37:09] So that basically turns this area into a full blown reconstruct of the roadway since

[1:37:14] we would be digging that up already.

[1:37:16] And then, once you get that far, the next block over is one of the worst street sections

[1:37:25] in town.

[1:37:25] I mean that if you go out and drive it, it is alligator cracked, and it is just there's

[1:37:30] no repairing it at this point.

[1:37:33] And also from 2nd Street all the way west to Cheyenne Street, that is also as fast

[1:37:39] concrete pipe that again is beyond its design life and in need of replacement.

[1:37:46] Right now we do have the unique opportunity. There's a grant that I've

[1:37:50] talked about a number of times in front where the Department of Water Resources

[1:37:54] does give us grant money to pay for 60% of any water main replacement that

[1:38:00] we're doing in these areas that would be applicable to this. We have a

[1:38:05] because of the timing of when those funds need to be applied for. We have

[1:38:09] already applied for that grant. That doesn't mean we have to do the project

[1:38:13] and use it, but didn't want to lose the window in applying for that. I would

[1:38:17] expect that we would be successful in getting that. And so it's kind of one

[1:38:23] of the project is as soon as you get over to second, it's only a block of

[1:38:28] really bad roadway and water main that is more than 50% paid for to

[1:38:33] to increase from there. We don't have any more sanitary sewer that we would be

[1:38:39] doing west of second again because the sanitary sewer is in the back alleys in

[1:38:44] these areas and we did just we're in the process of finishing up a project

[1:38:48] right now where we relined all of those mains. So the sanitary sewer is for

[1:38:52] the most part taken care of in this area and this had become basically

[1:38:57] more of a water main and as we're going by there's some storm sewer

[1:39:00] inlets. Not a lot of mainline storm sewer running east and west down the corridor, but

[1:39:06] as we're going past to replace some lead pipes that the existing storm sewer is undersized

[1:39:13] to today's standards. So we would just at the intersections be making some storm sewer

[1:39:19] corrections with those. West of what I would call the school property because eventually

[1:39:26] that roadway just ends up running right into the school property. I would say west

[1:39:30] of the school property. The curb and gutter in that area isn't that bad. It is an area

[1:39:38] where we're in the feasibility study they recommended basically that we could replace

[1:39:42] the water main in that area again with that grant money and then by the and included in

[1:39:49] what is funded through that grant is also replacing some of the roadway that's above

[1:39:53] the pipe that we're replacing. So we're getting roughly say half of the roadway

[1:39:57] already paid for to install that water main and it wouldn't make sense just to

[1:40:03] probably just leave a trench with a couple cold joints running down the

[1:40:07] length of the trench. So what we would be looking to do there would be to

[1:40:10] actually replace the pavement out to the curb line and in the days that that

[1:40:16] was installed there was no drain tile. So one of the things that we can do is

[1:40:20] we can retrofit the inside of the curb with the drain tile so we can

[1:40:23] pick up some subsurface moisture and ambient water from the sub-base, get that into the

[1:40:28] local storm sewer collection to help these roads perform longer, and in doing so we would

[1:40:38] be able to basically get that roadway replaced as new with new water main, and in the end

[1:40:46] it would leave this entire corridor from Cheyenne Street to the east reconstructed

[1:40:50] because in 2017 the first avenue east of this area was reconstructed so that

[1:40:59] would basically complete this corridor in the in the core area with the new

[1:41:05] water mains. A lot of information but that's basically the crux to the

[1:41:10] project. The new funds this is a 3.86 million dollar project. We believe

[1:41:18] that we would be getting just short of a million dollars of grant money for that. Per

[1:41:23] the 2024 CIP guidelines, this is a reconstruct in an existing area, so we would be looking

[1:41:28] at the city. The capital improvement sales tax will be paying for 70% of the cost of

[1:41:33] the improvements after the whole total project is bought down by the grant, leaving what

[1:41:39] we're estimating to be is approximately 776,000. That would be the 30% of the remainder

[1:41:47] that we would be looking to assess. And with that, I would stand for any questions.

[1:41:53] Commissioner Jorgensen, when would you look at doing this project next year?

[1:41:57] It would be next year. If tonight the Commission decides to proceed with the

[1:42:01] project, the first thing that we would probably do is come back next at the

[1:42:06] next meeting and pass a resolution of necessity because this, even though this

[1:42:10] is a water project and a sewer project on the east side, we would want to

[1:42:16] to pass a resolution or necessity for this project.

[1:42:19] That would mean that we would have to advertise it,

[1:42:21] but we would use that as an opportunity

[1:42:23] to start having basically,

[1:42:24] instead of just having a hearing of protest,

[1:42:27] we would also be looking to schedule neighborhood meetings

[1:42:30] as we did with the Westwood neighborhood.

[1:42:32] I think with all of these core area projects,

[1:42:34] the first step as soon as the commission decides

[1:42:36] we are moving forward with the project

[1:42:38] is to send out letters,

[1:42:40] get the residents into the fire hall again,

[1:42:43] and be able to lay out the project that needs for the project and provide the

[1:42:49] people within that improvement district the opportunity to see what the plan is

[1:42:53] and what we were looking to do. So we would move forward on a two-pronged

[1:42:59] phase. One would be community engagement with the stakeholders in the

[1:43:02] area and then the second one would be also to have that resolution and

[1:43:07] necessity passed so that way there would be an opportunity for the

[1:43:12] residents in the improvement district to issue a protest to the creation of that

[1:43:16] district. I think the big logistical item here would be the rural fire

[1:43:20] department. All our trucks come out that north door on the first avenue. Yeah, and

[1:43:25] there would definitely need to be a lot of coordination with that.

[1:43:32] Any other

[1:43:33] questions?

[1:43:37] We'll look for the engineers report and direct engineer or plan

[1:43:40] specs. Commissioner Olson moves to approve the engineers report and

[1:43:45] director engineer to prepare plans and specification for improvement district

[1:43:48] number 3009 1st Avenue East reconstruction Cheyenne Street to 4th

[1:43:53] that Street East is there a second second mr. Anderson seconds we have a

[1:43:58] motion in the second is there any discussion hearing down all those in

[1:44:03] favor please signify by saying I like opposed motion carried thank you move

[1:44:09] on to item number 12 project number 1351 is a sanitary lift station SA 27

[1:44:15] rehabilitation. We call on Mr. Jerry Wallace, City Engineer. The purpose of this discussion

[1:44:21] is to accept the bid and award the contract. Good evening, Mr. Wallace, and welcome.

[1:44:26] Good evening, Mr. Commission President and Commissioners. Thank you for your time tonight.

[1:44:32] As everybody is probably well aware, this is our big sanitary lift station on the

[1:44:37] south side of town that the entire south side pumps into and that continues to

[1:44:43] move that sewer downward. Very critical lift station that we need to keep you

[1:44:48] know in good working order and functioning. Essentially we're here

[1:44:52] tonight to award a rehabilitation project to ensure that will continue to

[1:44:58] happen.

[1:45:00] Essentially, we'd be looking at awarding the base project to ICS in the amount of $1,446,400.

[1:45:08] The mechanical portion would be going to CC Steel in the amount of $125,000. And the electrical

[1:45:15] portion would be going to JDP Electric in the amount of $381,587. The total of all the

[1:45:23] bids, as you can see there in your packet, is $1,952,987 compared to the engineer's opinion

[1:45:32] of cost. That is slightly below what we had anticipated at $2,160,000. There's a bunch

[1:45:42] of documentation available in your packet here for your review. But again, our staff

[1:45:48] recommendation would be to accept the bid and award the contract ICS for $1,446,400,

[1:45:56] CC Steel for $125,000, and JDP Electric for $381,587. As far as the financial components

[1:46:07] and funding mechanism for this work, there is a significant amount of money still remaining

[1:46:12] in a legacy fund, call it, that that's my term,

[1:46:17] but essentially any properties on the south side

[1:46:20] that developed paid into this fund a hookup fee

[1:46:24] that involved reimbursement essentially

[1:46:29] for the cost of this lift station.

[1:46:31] And it would be our intention to draw

[1:46:34] from those funds to pay for the project.

[1:46:37] With that being said, I'm available for any questions.

[1:46:41] please note there's no special assessments are intended to be used in

[1:46:45] the conjunction with this project. Any questions for Mr. Ballish?

[1:46:51] No? Mr. Zendal

[1:46:53] moves to approve project number 1351 to accept the bid and to award the

[1:46:58] contract. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Olsen seconds. We have a

[1:47:02] motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in

[1:47:07] favor, please signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. We move on to item

[1:47:14] number 13. Improvement District number 3008, Meadow Ridge Development Reconstruction. Again,

[1:47:21] we call on Jerry Wallace, the city engineer. The purpose of the discussion is to approve

[1:47:25] an engineer's report, direct the engineer to prepare both plans and specifications,

[1:47:30] and a task order for basic services. Mr. Wallace.

[1:47:34] Thank you, Mr. Commissioner President and commissioners. Again, try to be respectful of your time tonight.

[1:47:41] I wish I could have gone directly after Dan's presentation with this one and just said ditto, but I will do my best to follow him up.

[1:47:50] Essentially, we're here tonight. Several years ago, we had requests from at least one commissioner to take a look at the streets in the Meadow Ridge neighborhood.

[1:48:00] a lot of the infrastructure as far as the street components is past its useful

[1:48:05] wife and diving into and looking at that work potentially doing mill and

[1:48:10] overlays what we found was that you know there's some areas of the street that

[1:48:15] are only two to four inches of asphalt and essentially a mill and overlay

[1:48:19] project would not be a money well spent there was a lot of curb and

[1:48:26] to the point that you know we just we started trending towards looking that

[1:48:30] we'd be reconstructing the entire street and given the age of a lot of the

[1:48:35] utilities in there at just under 50 years I believe it didn't seem to make

[1:48:40] sense to us to reconstruct reconstruct the street and then potentially

[1:48:44] sometime in the next 20 years before the streets useful wife was up have to

[1:48:50] go back in and essentially be looking at reconstructing the water and sewer

[1:48:55] or in storm with the neighborhood as well.

[1:49:00] Bunch of documents before you tonight.

[1:49:02] I'll try to walk through things as best I can here,

[1:49:05] but I've touched on the street component.

[1:49:09] I will say that the sanitary sewer

[1:49:11] through this area in particular is generally flat.

[1:49:15] There's quite often times where public works

[1:49:18] is having to be out there weekly,

[1:49:20] jetting and vectoring the sanitary sewer system.

[1:49:26] and then the water mains in the area are again ACP at her, you know, starting to go beyond

[1:49:33] their useful life. You know, as Dan had kind of commented, we're trying to take advantage

[1:49:39] of a lot of funding components through the state similar to the previous project that

[1:49:45] he presented.

[1:49:48] Basically, we would be looking at, as far as the financial components here,

[1:49:52] This again would be a 70 30 split where the city would pay the 70% of the cost of the project and we'd be looking at special assessing that that remaining 30%.

[1:50:07] And again, as Dan alluded to, you know, if the commission chooses to move forward with this project, we would very quickly here be, you know, beginning to engage the neighborhood and meetings and, you know, try to, I guess,

[1:50:24] you know, walk the initial phases of the project through that and hopefully come to a point

[1:50:32] where we have a good project that, you know, the neighborhood can be happy with and essentially

[1:50:37] we'll have, you know, completed the, hopefully the first reconstruction of the Meadow Ridge

[1:50:43] neighborhood.

[1:50:44] Our staff recommendation tonight would be to approve the engineers report and direct

[1:50:49] both plans and specifications and approve the task order for basic services. Again,

[1:50:56] with that, I'm available for any questions you may have.

[1:50:58] Mr. Charleston has a question.

[1:51:00] Thank you. Jerry, you said you wish you could have just said ditto to Dan's, but I see

[1:51:06] one slight difference. In this one there's a task order attached to it where Dan's

[1:51:12] did not, so I'm just wondering what's the task order on this one and why didn't

[1:51:17] we have one on the other one?

[1:51:20] I intentionally held a task order and told the consultant to hold off on the

[1:51:25] task order on mine because in the 2024 CIP for the first Avenue project it

[1:51:31] originally was just a fourth to second so I wanted to see if the Commission

[1:51:36] wanted to proceed with that project this project or that project and that

[1:51:40] way I wouldn't have a multi-tiered task order in front of you I could just

[1:51:43] get one that matches the scope. Okay, thank you.

[1:51:47] Commissioner Zendal. This would basically be the same scope of project that we're

[1:51:52] doing in Westwood this summer. It would be a total reconstruct. Very similar.

[1:51:56] Okay. Yes ma'am. Anyone else? I motion to improve the engineers report and direct

[1:52:01] engineering to prepare both plans and specs and a task order for services.

[1:52:05] Thank you Commissioner Jorgensen. We have a motion to approve. Is there a

[1:52:08] second? Second. Commissioner Zendal seconds. We have a motion and a second

[1:52:12] for improvement district number 3008 to approve the engineers report the

[1:52:16] recti engineer to prepare both plans and specifications and a task order for

[1:52:21] basic services. Is there any further discussion?

[1:52:26] Hearing none all those in

[1:52:27] favor please signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you. Thank

[1:52:32] you for your time. Number 14 is an improvement district number 6059

[1:52:36] Sidewalk improvements, 2024 walks,

[1:52:44] am I on the right spot?

[1:52:48] That project got pulled from tonight's agenda.

[1:52:51] So not on my agenda, it didn't.

[1:52:53] All right, number 15 is a resolution authorizing participation in the national opioid settlements.

[1:53:00] We're going to call on Mrs. Kitty Schmidt, city attorney for the city of West Fargo.

[1:53:04] Thank you, Commission President and Commissioners.

[1:53:06] as you may be aware, Purdue pharma petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2019

[1:53:12] following the filing of thousands of lawsuits due to its role in the opioid crisis.

[1:53:18] Since filing, Purdue has been working with creditor stakeholders to arrive at an acceptable bankruptcy plan.

[1:53:24] Purdue recently filed its latest plan as in the process of soliciting votes from creditors.

[1:53:29] As part of the proposed bankruptcy plan, Purdue and its owners will deposit billions of dollars into trust for creditors.

[1:53:36] One such trust will be for governmental entities to receive funds.

[1:53:40] The state of North Dakota has opted into receiving funds from its trust and it will receive the

[1:53:46] greatest allocation from the trust if a higher number of North Dakota counties and cities

[1:53:53] also opt into participating in the trust.

[1:53:56] If an entity doesn't opt into the trust, then the trustee will set aside those trust

[1:54:01] funds to use in defending against claims that are brought by those counties or

[1:54:06] cities that didn't opt in. What I have for you tonight to consider is a

[1:54:10] resolution to opt into the bankruptcy trust and the possibility to receive

[1:54:15] funds from the trust. Really the only reason to not opt into the

[1:54:20] trust settlement would be if the city has separate claims that it wants to

[1:54:23] pursue against Purdue or its owners, but I'm not aware of any of those

[1:54:28] separate claims and even if they were they would be incredibly difficult to to

[1:54:32] collect on. I'm available for any questions that you may have about the

[1:54:35] resolution. I'm available for any questions that you may have about the resolution.

[1:54:36] Questions for Ms. Smith?

[1:54:38] Mr. Zundow?

[1:54:38] I'm not necessarily for you, but Dustin is this some of the stuff that we, I feel like

[1:54:43] we've received settlement money and then we in turn give it to CASS Public Health?

[1:54:49] Yep.

[1:54:50] That would be accurate.

[1:54:51] Is it the same thing?

[1:54:52] Yes, Commissioner. Yes, we do have an agreement with the City of Fargo, CASS County,

[1:54:56] Fargo Cast Public Health, we are currently receiving settlement funds from a few other

[1:55:03] entities. Those funds are collectively given to Fargo Cast Public Health to manage a program

[1:55:10] and dedicate their time to use those funds.

[1:55:13] So this would be, I presume, the same thing, any funds we would receive would be passed

[1:55:17] through for programming for that?

[1:55:18] That's correct, based on our joint agreement.

[1:55:21] Okay, thank you.

[1:55:25] This is an actionable item.

[1:55:27] Moved, we approve.

[1:55:28] Mr. Olson moves to approve the resolution authorizing participation in the national opioid settlements.

[1:55:34] Is there a second?

[1:55:35] Second.

[1:55:36] This is Undell's second.

[1:55:37] We have a motion and a second.

[1:55:39] Is there any discussion?

[1:55:40] Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

[1:55:43] Aye.

[1:55:44] Opposed?

[1:55:46] Motion carried.

[1:55:47] Item number 15 is to appoint a representative and an alternate for the Cass Clay Interagency

[1:55:54] Council on Homelessness. Thank you.

[1:56:00] Mr. Scott. Thank you President Dardis and

[1:56:03] Commissioners. So for those that aren't familiar, the Council was recently

[1:56:08] formed and

[1:56:12] they pardon the interruption. So the Council was recently

[1:56:15] formed and held their inaugural meeting back in July. Following that

[1:56:19] inaugural meeting, the participants made a suggestion or a motion to

[1:56:26] request that each participating agency designate a representative and an

[1:56:31] alternate to attend their meetings. Specifically the agencies that are

[1:56:37] involved, Cass County, Clay County, Dilworth, Fargo, Horace, Moorhead and West

[1:56:42] Fargo. They did request that the primary representative hold the portfolio of

[1:56:49] homelessness, housing, or related human services. We don't really have a

[1:56:53] portfolio that really aligns with that you could argue administrative services

[1:56:57] which is a president Otis or you could argue community and development services

[1:57:01] which would be Commissioner Anderson but they're not stuck on that it was just

[1:57:06] kind of a request or a suggestion so at this time I'll let you discuss

[1:57:15] amongst yourselves who would be designated to represent the City of

[1:57:21] West Fargo again as the primary representative and an alternate. Since

[1:57:27] the council was formed I've represented the city of West Fargo at all the

[1:57:30] meetings.

[1:57:34] Are you happy to do it? I nominate

[1:57:39] mayor's artists to be our representative.

[1:57:44] Second, is there anybody else who wants to do it?

[1:57:47] We do have to have, they do request that in case I can't make it, they do

[1:57:55] Commissioner Zundow has volunteered to be the alternate commissioner. Do we have a consensus

[1:58:00] that myself and Commissioner Zundow be there? All right. Very good. Thank you. Thank you,

[1:58:07] Mr. Scott. Thank you very much. Your city administrators report.

[1:58:11] I just have a brief report. I want to let you all know that we had a great North Dakota

[1:58:16] League of Cities conference last week. President Dardis, myself, and Willie attended.

[1:58:24] Our

[1:58:24] So it was a great experience, great discussions with our other cities that are out there.

[1:58:32] So I can tell you that based on whatever we're hearing statewide, there are a lot of challenges out there.

[1:58:37] We're not immune to those things.

[1:58:41] But I will also say with a high level of pride that I really appreciate where we are at as a city,

[1:58:48] where we are going and very much appreciate the opportunity

[1:58:53] to lead that effort.

[1:58:54] So that's the only update I have for you.

[1:58:57] I stand for any questions?

[1:58:58] Questions for Mr. Scott?

[1:59:02] No, thank you.

[1:59:03] Thank you.

[1:59:04] All correspondence has been distributed

[1:59:06] in your mailboxes unless you have received

[1:59:10] something individually that you'd like to share.

[1:59:13] No, okay.

[1:59:14] Does any commissioner have any non-agenda items

[1:59:16] you'd like to discuss this evening?

[1:59:18] Does any department have any non-agenda items you'd like to discuss?

[1:59:25] All right.

[1:59:26] Commissioner Anderson.

[1:59:27] Over to adjourn.

[1:59:28] Commissioner Olsen.

[1:59:29] Second.

[1:59:30] We stand adjourned.

City Commission Meeting (Third)

Agenda

Transcript