[0:30] Good evening and welcome to the Monday, July 6, 2026 West Fargo City Commission meeting.

[0:35] Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[0:43] the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God,

[0:50] indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[0:53] All

[0:58] right, the next item is a roll call.

[1:00] Good morning.

[1:01] Commissioner Jorgensen.

[1:03] President Maison.

[1:05] Commissioner Zendall.

[1:06] Here.

[1:07] Commissioner Erickson.

[1:08] Here.

[1:09] Commissioner Sedman.

[1:10] Here.

[1:11] Commissioner Dredelich.

[1:12] Here.

[1:14] All right, the next item is to prove the order of the agenda.

[1:17] and a.

[1:18] We'll leave it.

[1:20] Second.

[1:21] Any discussion?

[1:24] Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:27] Aye.

[1:27] All right.

[1:29] Motion passes.

[1:31] All right.

[1:32] Approval of the minutes from the June 15th,

[1:35] 2026 commission meeting.

[1:37] I'll move to approve.

[1:39] Is there a second?

[1:41] Second.

[1:42] All right.

[1:43] Any discussion?

[1:45] Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:47] Aye.

[1:49] Opposed?

[1:51] Passes.

[1:52] Building permits. Item number F.

[1:57] Mayor?

[1:58] Yes.

[1:59] I need to recuse myself from voting on the building permits, please.

[2:04] All right.

[2:07] I move we approve.

[2:08] Is there a second?

[2:10] I'll second.

[2:11] We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?

[2:15] Hearing none, all those in favor please say aye.

[2:18] Aye.

[2:18] All right, I opposed.

[2:21] Motion passes.

[2:24] Our consent agenda, items A through B.

[2:29] Questions or comments?

[2:32] I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda.

[2:34] All right, we have a motion to approve.

[2:37] Second, we have a second.

[2:39] Any discussion?

[2:45] Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

[2:47] Aye.

[2:48] Aye.

[2:49] Opposed?

[2:50] The consent agenda passes.

[2:53] Under the regular agenda, and I don't believe we have any public comment tonight. Is that correct?

[2:58] That is correct.

[3:00] All right. And no public hearing. So we will jump to item number three, the first reading of ordinance number 1281 relating to discharge of firearms and carrying loaded firearms in vehicles.

[3:12] Chief of Police, Peter Nielsen.

[3:14] Good evening, Commission President Jurteweg, fellow commissioners. I stand before you tonight

[3:20] with the first reading of ordinance 1281 Discharge of Firearms, Dangerous Weapons within the City.

[3:26] The proposed change to this ordinance would be section, in section 2, subsection number

[3:31] 5. And what that states is persons lawfully participating in a management plan or program

[3:38] are approved by the City Commission for the control of deer or other animals within

[3:42] the city limits. Just a little bit of feedback on this. Back in June of 2022, the police department

[3:49] came to in front of the commission in regarding some fire on usage by the USDA. The USDA was

[3:57] contracted out by different entities, mainly Cargill in the city of West Fargo and to

[4:03] have them come out and to euthanize some of the animals that would be coming up

[4:07] passed on the property. The commission granted that that conditional usage but

[4:13] that only lasted for one year. So what we're proposing is to bring this change

[4:18] of the ordinance so we could go into a MOU or MOA with with the USDA to allow

[4:24] them access to come into the city and to use a firearm to euthanize these

[4:31] animals. But with this gives us more clarity, more control over the

[4:37] situation, because of the fact that now we have an actual MOA with them. It strictly advises

[4:43] the USDA what they can and cannot do. It also advises them of a procedure of how we'd like

[4:50] that to be done, and what that would be was contacting whatever dispatch, contacting

[4:56] the on-duty sergeant to know that they're going to be at those facilities during different

[5:01] times. So we think this is a good ordinance. We've had help with our city attorney

[5:06] and we believe that this would be something that could benefit the USDA along with the

[5:13] police department. We also have Mr. Brandon Nooner here. He's a representative from USDA

[5:18] if you have any questions. But at this time, I stand for any questions on the first reading.

[5:24] Any questions? I know you had mentioned that it would be basically number five on that first

[5:31] section. On that copy that we have, G and H are also underlined under number two. Are

[5:38] those additions due to century code changes? I'm assuming that's why that's in there?

[5:43] Yes. Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. That's all I have.

[5:46] I just have a quick question, Chief Nielsen. Who will be monitoring to ensure that the

[5:50] rule set up that they do let you know that there's going to be firearm discharge? What

[5:55] happens if they don't? Who monitors that?

[5:57] So, if they wouldn't do that, they would break the MOA, so at that point we would believe

[6:04] that at that time the MOA would not be in accordance and it wouldn't be valid any longer, so they

[6:10] would not be able to utilize the procedures that they're looking to do.

[6:15] Do they see that in the changes, is the question?

[6:20] I don't know if the MOA is actually in the agenda packet at this time because it

[6:24] hasn't been sent to the mayor and the city attorney or the city manager so I

[6:31] don't think that's a movie it is in there it's attached it's attached yeah so

[6:35] presumably that person who did that not under the MBOA would be I presume charged

[6:39] with discharging a firearm within city limits because they wouldn't be doing so

[6:42] under accordance of a contract would that be correct any

[6:49] additional questions

[6:53] what's your preference I move that we approve the first reading all right we

[7:00] Any further discussion?

[7:04] Hearing none, all those in favor? Oh, actually, we're a slight change.

[7:09] Moving forward, almost screwed it up, Emily. A slight change is moving forward on the regular agenda items.

[7:15] We're going to be doing a roll call vote. So, Emily, you want to take over?

[7:20] And it'll also be a random shuffle. I just did a literal shuffle button on the website, so.

[7:27] Are we ready?

[7:28] Yeah, it's going to be a surprise who gets here first.

[7:35] I'm sorry.

[7:42] Zundal?

[7:44] Yes.

[7:44] Erickson?

[7:45] Yes.

[7:46] Steadman?

[7:46] Yes.

[7:47] Jardovic?

[7:48] Yes.

[7:49] Motion passes.

[7:51] Thank you.

[7:53] Item number four, Improvement District number 3006, Westwood Reconstruction, City Engineer,

[8:00] Jerry Walz.

[8:03] Yes.

[8:03] Thank you, Mr. Commissioner and Commissioners.

[8:06] Here before you tonight with an item for the Westwood Reconstruct Project Improvement

[8:13] District number 3006, essentially this is a change order for the amount shown there $154,911.80

[8:23] where we would be installing the final asphalt lift to complete the streets for the neighborhood.

[8:32] Again, as you can see in the packet there, funding would be proposed to come from the

[8:37] Capital Improvement Sales Tax Fund.

[8:40] When we originally scoped this work, that was how we had anticipated completing that

[8:46] work, so no change from the intent there.

[8:50] Essentially, just a brief background in history behind this.

[8:57] When we originally scoped the project, there was meetings with engineering staff, public

[9:02] work staff, our consultant engineer about looking at essentially holding off on the final lift

[9:09] of asphalt.

[9:10] There's several communities in the area that's a common practice, and we wanted to try to

[9:17] see if it was something that we could implement in West Fargo.

[9:21] Over the course of the project now, you know, we've had some, you know, call it

[9:27] growing pains, we've learned some things. You know, one thing that, you know,

[9:30] Public Works had commented on is that, you know, it made their operations more

[9:34] difficult, more challenging. So that was something that, you know, we're

[9:40] certainly considering at this point. The other thing that was noted is just

[9:44] because there's that little lip, you know, between the curb and the asphalt,

[9:47] There is going to be some standing water that just commonly sits there until it evaporates.

[9:55] And then there was also identified that it is a potential tripping hazard throughout the neighborhood.

[10:00] So just something else to think about.

[10:03] But essentially at this point now, we've observed pretty minimal sediment.

[10:09] There's been one full freeze-thaw cycle on the roads in the underground in the neighborhood.

[10:16] We have three options. We can install the final where course now under the existing contract, as is shown in the change order in the packet.

[10:27] We could potentially look to bid this work as a separate future project, or we could delay the installation.

[10:36] Initially, we had talked about just having public works, you know, put the final lift

[10:41] of asphalt in since for several years now, they've been completing mill and overlays.

[10:49] Unfortunately, I'm sure everybody's aware of the pending litigation on that, so the

[10:53] jury's still out as to whether or not we'll be able to continue to do that.

[10:57] But again, here before you tonight with that change order, our recommendation is

[11:04] that we proceed with approving the change order and install that final lift with the

[11:09] contractor we have under contract right now. And with that, I'm available for any questions

[11:15] you may have. Does anyone have any questions?

[11:19] Just a quick question. Maybe it's that terminology. When you say it's a change order, this is

[11:23] part of the original project. So the reason it's a change order is because we didn't

[11:27] do it originally, so we're coming back now to finish the project. And that's

[11:30] Why is the change order?

[11:32] Great question.

[11:34] So essentially, this was not going

[11:37] to be part of the original project.

[11:39] And public works had attended, like I said,

[11:43] to just do this with likely capital improvement sales tax.

[11:50] And so now we're making it part of the project.

[11:56] Great question.

[11:57] Good clarification.

[11:58] Thank you.

[11:59] any other questions? I'll make a motion to approve. Alright, we have a motion to

[12:05] approve. Is there a second? Second. I have a second. Any additional discussion?

[12:13] Hearing none. Mr. Mayor. Yeah. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Mr. Wallace, if you feel

[12:22] comfortable answering the question, you know, moving forward with this

[12:27] projects in foregoing doing the work ourselves internally. That doesn't have

[12:35] any bearing on anything with that litigation, does it? No, not that I'm aware.

[12:42] Okay, Commissioner. Great question. Okay, thank you. You bet. All right, I'll do a

[12:50] Is that all, Jorgensen?

[13:02] Zendall? Yes.

[13:04] Erickson? Yes. Steadman? Yes.

[13:07] Jardavik? Yes. Motion passes. Thank you.

[13:12] All right. Number five is our proposed organizational appointments and assignments.

[13:17] That one is assigned to me. Have fun.

[13:22] I won't go through all of this, but just to kind of make sure to call out a couple changes

[13:29] changes from how this has been done in the past.

[13:32] You'll notice that the portfolio assignments have changed to really just have a primary

[13:36] portfolio and getting rid of the secondary portfolios, which is about driving some clarity

[13:41] and also to map our portfolio assignments to our city leadership structure.

[13:46] So that's kind of the main item.

[13:49] The only other one that I will call out just so that people don't think it's a

[13:52] typo, because it's not, is former Mayor Dardis is going to be appointed to continue to be

[14:01] in the seat for the Lake Agassiz Water Authority. So, any questions or discussion?

[14:12] Since it's

[14:12] my motion or my topic, I will make the motion to approve. Second. All right, we have a

[14:18] motion in a second. Any further discussion?

[14:23] All right, we can vote, Emily.

[14:25] Jorgensen? Yes. Zendal? Yes. Erickson? Yes. Steadman? Yes. Jodovic? Yes. All right. The portfolio

[14:37] assignments have passed. Item number six, direct staff to work on policy options regarding the

[14:43] use of economic development sales tax funds. So to try to simplify and make and help people

[14:52] understand what this ask is. So any time that over quite a few years

[15:00] The city has provided some type of an incentive for economic development, you know, the construction

[15:05] of a building, for example. And if it was a pilot or a TIF, you know, some type of tax incentive

[15:13] that was passed. So for example, if a property was, you know, paying $5,000 a year in property

[15:21] tax, and that building gets torn down, and it's now, you know, the new structures, you

[15:25] You know, should be being taxed 50 grand a year, but for maybe a period of five years

[15:30] they're continuing to only pay the five.

[15:33] So that has an impact in theory on our budget.

[15:37] What I'm suggesting is to look at the options and to come back to the commission to approve

[15:47] that, but to look at paying for that out of economic development sales tax.

[15:52] So, basically, as part of our budgeting process, we would look like, what are those incentive

[15:57] dollars that we would sort of be missing, I guess you could say, for the 2027?

[16:04] And in conversations, the estimate is probably four to $500,000 in that ballpark.

[16:12] And to sort of make the budget, and Dustin might not like me using this word, but I'll

[16:17] say it make the make the budget whole for the dollars that we would have

[16:20] otherwise had if those incentives hadn't been given out and the building had

[16:25] been built. So that's the general idea. I don't know if you guys have any

[16:31] questions. Hopefully I explain that well.

[16:35] Mayor Durdavig, I was just gonna

[16:36] mention I fully support exactly what your this isn't an actionable item by

[16:41] the way is it this is just well we are taking a vote to direct city staff

[16:45] to so it is so fully support this so when I was campaigning the last six

[16:53] months you know there are a lot of different conversations about the idea

[16:56] of how there's a clear opportunity cost with giving out incentives that you're

[17:02] losing out on that tax revenue property tax revenue over those the

[17:06] duration of those incentives being in place and this if feasible on multiple

[17:12] for us. I think it's a really good idea, so I just wanted to tell you that. I thought it was a

[17:18] good idea. Appreciate that. Any other discussion or questions? Do you have sort of a guideline of

[17:24] what you're looking for so that the staff doesn't just kind of wonder what you're looking for? Yeah,

[17:29] so I mean it's very specific in the conversations I've had around commercial development. So this

[17:36] is not looking at housing incentives or anything like that. It is specific to commercial properties

[17:43] because those arguably any incentive that has been provided by the commission has been

[17:50] done so, I would assume, under the belief of economic development. And voters have

[17:56] given us an economic development sales tax that we can utilize to offset that.

[18:08] Any

[18:08] Any other questions?

[18:14] You look like you have a question.

[18:15] No.

[18:16] All right.

[18:17] Well, again, since this is mine,

[18:18] I'll make the motion to direct city staff

[18:22] to work on a policy options regarding the use

[18:25] of these dollars as discussed.

[18:27] Second.

[18:28] We have a second.

[18:29] Any further discussion?

[18:34] Hearing none.

[18:35] Emily.

[18:36] Jorgensen.

[18:45] Zendall.

[18:46] Yes.

[18:47] Erickson.

[18:48] Yes.

[18:48] Steadman.

[18:49] Yes.

[18:50] Jodefin.

[18:50] Yes.

[18:51] Motion passes.

[18:54] Item number seven, direct staff to work on community outreach options regarding data

[18:58] centers.

[18:58] So, trying to make this quick, first off, there's just a, so there's no rumors.

[19:04] There's, you know, no conversation being had.

[19:07] There's nothing I'm aware of, but through the campaign and in talking with people

[19:12] and, you know, just around the entire country, there's a lot of challenges within communities

[19:19] around data centers and even locally we can see you know with what applied

[19:23] digital stepping into Harwood you know a year ago and and and those those projects

[19:27] come really quick they can be there can be a lot of misinformation in the

[19:32] public and there's a lot of opinions on both sides of that and you know just

[19:38] under the belief of wanting to be proactive you know I really as part

[19:43] of this commission don't want to wait until the day an opportunity could

[19:46] present itself and then not have had the opportunity before that to gather a community input.

[19:52] And so this motion is really to direct city staff to look at options for community outreach,

[19:59] both to, you know, maybe dispel some of the rumors and misinformation out there, but also

[20:03] to kind of try to get a gauge as to where the community is.

[20:07] Is West Fargo open to that kind of development?

[20:11] Are we not?

[20:12] And, you know, that empowers us as a commission, I think it empowers us from an economic development perspective knowing that answer.

[20:19] And so that's the general idea.

[20:24] Do you, I'm presuming this is going to have a fiscal loan attached to it.

[20:27] So are you proposing that sort of come out of economic development sales tax to fund it?

[20:31] In terms of, like, doing, like, a public forum or something, any...

[20:35] Or, like, surveys or, I mean, anything, mailers, anything that we would have.

[20:39] I think it's directing city staff to come back with a little bit of a plan whether that's

[20:45] a survey, whether that's a community forum.

[20:47] If there is a request for dollars, then that would probably be the end of that.

[20:51] So you're just looking for how we would, of course, support that?

[20:54] Yep.

[20:54] This is really about directing city staff, so the time commitment to come up with a

[20:58] plan and come back so that we can be proactive, I guess, in terms of how we look at this

[21:04] topic.

[21:06] I like it.

[21:07] Do you want to make the primary motion?

[21:09] Because you go three for three?

[21:11] Oh, sorry.

[21:11] Question or comment?

[21:12] You're OK?

[21:13] Mayor, I just wanted to add one thing.

[21:15] So if you've been following the legislative interim committees that have been happening

[21:19] and in the spirit of expedition because of, you know, because things are happening

[21:26] so quickly out, you know, in the private landscape, if the only revision, if I could

[21:32] would add to it is if we could add a duration or kind of a deadline for staff to get back

[21:40] to us by the end of the third Wednesday or the third Monday next month, if that is feasible.

[21:50] So timely is what we're looking for.

[21:53] Yes, yep.

[21:54] I completely would agree with that.

[21:55] Just to add exactly what you were saying because things, we wouldn't want to pass

[22:02] on something because we didn't, we didn't do our due diligence with getting industry

[22:07] different coalition groups to come in and educate us.

[22:12] I think that sounds wonderful.

[22:14] Awesome.

[22:17] Any further questions?

[22:18] If none, again, I will make my own motion to direct staff, along with what Commissioner

[22:26] Verixen suggested in terms of timeframe.

[22:30] Is there a second?

[22:31] Second.

[22:31] All right. Any further discussion?

[22:36] Hearing none, we'll go ahead and vote.

[22:39] Jorgensen? Yes. Zundal? Yes. Erickson? Yes. Steadman? Yes. Jordavik? Yes. All right. Our

[22:49] City Administrators' Reports. Dustin Scott, City Administrator.

[23:00] Well, good evening, Mayor and

[23:01] Commissioners. It's great to see fresh new faces up there. Looking forward to working with all

[23:07] will do. Just a few updates tonight. First, the first draft of the preliminary budget

[23:15] as has been scheduled will be in front of you at the next commission meeting. That again

[23:20] is the first draft of the entire preliminary budget. What we presented last month to the

[23:26] prior commission was really just an outline and an estimated position line. So what you'll

[23:31] see on July 20th will be a lot more detail as it will be again our our

[23:36] preliminary budget so now in the coming days and over the next couple weeks prior

[23:43] to that meeting you will receive a lot of budget information that'll be all of

[23:47] the departmental detail as well as some of the other the special funds that

[23:52] we have and really all of the meat of that budget so that you are fully

[23:56] prepared to provide feedback and comments at the July 20th meeting. Any questions on the

[24:03] preliminary budget?

[24:06] Right? Along the financial lines, update on our 2025 annual audit. Work

[24:13] is progressing nicely. We hope that I, Bailey, could even have a draft ready for that July

[24:20] 20th Commission meeting as well. Our Finance Director Willie is going to touch base with

[24:25] here and solidify that schedule. If not, hopefully the first meeting in August. So, again, things are

[24:32] going well with our 2025 audit. And then last, just more of a save the date announcement. We are

[24:41] planning to hold our annual employee appreciation event September 24th. That is a Thursday.

[24:49] And similar to last year, we are proposing to hold this at the city plaza at the lights,

[24:54] pending weather. If there is bad weather, we will pivot to a backup plan. But right now,

[25:00] just save the date for September 24th at the lights. With that, any other questions for me?

[25:11] Thank you.

[25:14] Correspondents?

[25:19] All right. Any non-agenda items?

[25:25] All right. Do we have a motion to adjourn?

[25:27] So moved. Second? Second. Alright, we stand adjourned. 25 minutes, not bad.

City Commission Meeting (First)

Transcript