City Commission - Regular Meeting

I'll call the meeting to order. Roll call, please.

Gullickson? Here. Peterson? Here. Strand? Here. Turnburg? Here. Beauches?

Here. Tonight, we're privileged to have a video highlighting the Forestry Division and the Arbor Day event they hosted in Anderson Park with the help of students from Carl Ben Eielson Middle School. So you can watch that on your screens.

so

The event we're having today is actually our 49th annual Arbor Day celebration. We're doing it because Fargo is a Tree City USA, again it's our 49th year that we've been having that designation. We're given that designation through the North Dakota Forest Service. We need to have a tree board, need to spend at least two dollars per capita in the city, and a tree ordinance, and then once a year we need to celebrate Arbor Day, which is what we're doing today. There were 85 trees planted today in about an hour and 15 minutes. We had a wide mix of trees that were planted out of the park here. We had some honey locusts, some elm, cedar. But this year we chose to involve the Fargo Park District, involve a school, Carl Ben Eielson Middle School with Fargo School District, a group from Bobcat that came in to help as well, a volunteer organization with River Coopers as well, just to kind of involve more than just ourselves, spread the planting opportunity around a little bit.

Thank you to our Forestry Division, Carl Ben Eielson Middle School students, Bob Katt, and of course Riverkeepers for making that event a success. We can always use more trees in our area, that's for sure. With that, we'll move on to approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the order of agenda? I so move. Thank you. Second. Second by Commissioner Peterson. Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Motion carried. We have the minutes in front of us from our regular meeting on July 6th and we had a special meeting on July 8th of 2026. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting on July 6th and the special meeting on July 8th of 2026? So moved. Second. Thank you. Seconded by Commissioner Turnberg. Any discussion on the minutes or the motion? Excuse me. Discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say nay. Thank you. The motion has carried. We are at are 5.05, so I'm gonna move us to the public hearings to make use of the time of the public that are here for that. We'll move, yes.

Mayor, we need to do the consent agenda.

You wanna do that before? Yes. Okay, all right. So we have a consent agenda in front of us. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda items number one through 26? I so move. I'll second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion about the motion? Mr. Mayor. Mr. Peterson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Gratitude to the department heads that were responsive to my myriad of questions. Grateful for you. I realize it's a bit of a pestering on occasion, so I apologize for that, but trying to educate myself. So thank you for your patience. Thank you for your information.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Any other discussion? Hearing none, roll call, please.

Turnberg? Aye. Strand?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

O'Shea? Aye.

All right, we'll move into our public hearings. We have quite a few today. So our first is item number 27. It's an application for a class GH alcoholic beverage license for Divine Taste of Africa, Cuisine Catering Services, LLC, doing business as Divine Taste of Africa, to be located at 855 45th Street South, Suite A1, This is continued from our June 22nd regular meeting, and we have Mr. Wisher from the Attorney's Office here to provide information.

Good evening, Commissioners. I am filling in for Angie Baer on behalf of the Auditor's Department this evening, so be nice with any questions. The first one we have today is Taste of Africa. A little background on this application. This is an issuance of a GH license. The licenses in Fargo are a bit of an alphabet soup. So a little background on the GH license. It allows beer and wine. No spirits are allowed. No bars allowed. No off-sales allowed. There is a food requirement of 50% or more. There are no caps on this type of license. The initial fee is $1,800 and the yearly fee is $700. A little background on this business, it is going to be an authentic African restaurant with casual family-friendly setting. The police did not identify any significant issues with the background check on the manager or owner. It was approved by the Liquor Control Board at the last meeting, so the Otters Department is looking for a motion to approve the issuance of the GH license to the applicant.

Thank you, Mr. Wisher. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to address the city commission regarding this application? Anyone from the public to speak to this application? Okay, hearing none. If not, we'll close the public hearing. Is there a motion, commission?

I so move. I can second.

All right, we have Commissioner Turnberg making the motion with Commissioner Gullixson seconding. Any discussion, commission? Any discussion? If not, we'll have a roll call.

Turnburg? Aye. Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Strand?

Yes.

Boucher?

Yes. Motion has carried. Item number 28, application for a Class FA alcoholic beverage license for La Terraza LLC, doing business as La Terraza Mexican Bar and Grill, to be located at 5570 32nd Avenue South. This is also continued from our June 22nd regular meeting. Mr. Wisher?

Mr. Wisher is appearing again on behalf of the Otters Department and Angie Bear. As was mentioned, this is an FA license. This license allows beer, wine, and spirits. They may have a bar. No off-sale is allowed. There is a food requirement of 50% or more. There are no caps on this type of license. This license does require a $100,000 initial fee, and after that, it's $1,700 yearly. A little background on this type of restaurant. It's going to be a Mexican family style. The goal is to be operational this summer. Owner and manager have other restaurants in the area. The background check was completed without any significant issues, and the Liquor Control Board approved the issuance of this license. We're here today asking to approve the issuance of the FA license to the applicant.

Thank you, Mr. Wisher. Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak to this application? Anyone from the public to speak to this application? Seeing none, is there a motion, commission?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any discussion? Commissioners, any discussion? Hearing none, we'll have a roll call vote.

Collickson? Yes. Turnberg?

Aye.

Peterson?

Yes.

Strand?

Yes.

O'Shea?

Yes. All right, thank you. We'll move on to item number 29, another public hearing for the application to transfer the Class AB alcoholic beverage license from Lytton Enterprises LLC, doing business as Duffy's Tavern, to Duffy's Tavern LLC, doing business as Duffy's Tavern, located at 16 12th Street South. Mr. Wisher.

Thank you, Mayor. The first two were initial issuances of licenses. This is actually a transfer, so it's a little bit different. The license that's being transferred here today is the AB license. In this license, it's a more standard bar license where they may sell beer, wine, and spirits. They may have a physical bar. There are no food requirements. There are a limited number of these licenses, I believe 22. Because this is a transfer and not initial issuance, the fee of $150,000 is not used. It's actually a transfer fee, which is the $2,400 yearly plus a $250 application fee. A little background on what's going on in this case is after 20 years of owning Duffy's, the owner is now selling to Duffy's Tavern LLC. The new owners are also a family business. They do not plan on making any immediate major changes to the establishment. The police did not identify any significant issues with the background check. The Liquor Control Board approved this transfer, so the Otters Department is looking for a motion to approve.

Thank you. Is there anyone from the public that would like to address the City Commission regarding this application? Anyone from the public to speak to this application? Hearing none, is there a motion? I so move. Thank you. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner. Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll do another roll call vote.

Turnburg? Aye. Peterson?

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

All right, moving on to item number 30, a public hearing. Thank you, Mr. Wisher. Moving on, number 30, Selkirk Place Sixth Edition, located at 6655 Selkirk Drive South. Looking for an approval recommended by the Planning Commission on June 2nd, 2026 of a zoning change from SR5, single dwelling residential, to SR2, single dwelling residential. Also a first reading of rezoning ordinance and a plat of Selkirk Place Sixth Edition. We have Mr. Kress from the Planning Department to speak to us about it today.

Thank you, sir. Good evening, Commissioners. Donald Kress of the Department of Planning and Development. Our hearing item tonight, item 30, includes an ordinance prepared by the City Attorney's Office. As the Mayor stated, this is Selkirk Place 6th Edition. Located here, this is, for reference, 64th Avenue South, I-29, 25th Street South. Davies High School is just off the photo down here. This is a... an undeveloped lot here, originally part of the Selkirk Place second edition. These photos show the site. There's a lot of construction going on in the Selkirk subdivisions, as you may know. So here we're looking just north across the subject property from 67th Avenue, and now we're on the other end of it looking south on this undeveloped lot. The lot across the street, that would be the lot over here, was also recently replatted by another developer to create five lots on that side of the street. The zoning here is SR5. It was originally proposed as townhomes by Eagle Ridge Development. That project never went forward, and so they are now rezoning it to six single-family lots, as we'll see on the plat in a moment. And the appropriate zoning for those would be SR2, so it matches the zoning across the street. This yellow here is SR2 and the adjacent lot. The subdivision plat here shows just the six lots here. And Mayor, we did get the signature block revised to your signature there. The staff report notes that there was one public comment at the July 7th, 2026 Planning Commission. The applicant's representative, John Younis of Eagle Ridge Development, is with us this evening and may wish to address the commission. The Planning Commission's recommendation is stated in the staff report and shown on your screen. That concludes staff's presentation for the Selkirk Place 6th edition. Thank you, commissioners.

Is there anyone from the public to speak to this application? Anyone from the public? Hearing none, I'll close the hearing. And commission, is there a motion? I so move.

I'll second.

Okay. Motion from Commissioner Turnberg, second by Commissioner Strand. Any discussion? Discussion?

All right.

Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote.

Turnberg?

Aye.

Strand?

Yes.

Gullixson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Boschee?

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Kress. Item number 31, public hearing for Fargo's Housing and Urban Development HUD Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report, or CAPER, for Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, and Home Investment Partnerships Home Programs. We have Ms. Crutchfield from the Planning Department to speak to us.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. Once a year, I'm in front of you to talk about the year-end report, if you will, for the had program activities for this preceding year. And just as a background, since this is the first time I'm in front of this board, current sitting members on the housing and urban development programs, I thought I'd do a quick overview as we proceed on. And basically the city of Fargo is one of a few cities in the state of North Dakota based on our population that makes us an entitlement community. And also the other term is participating jurisdiction. And that means we receive annual federal funding directly from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. On average, it's about $1.4 million a year that we allocated. And for HUD, the fiscal year is actually mid-year. The program year is mid-year. So I think May 1 was the start of our 26th year. So we're always about six months behind. and then we are required to develop a five-year plan as part of that work and this final plan that i'm reporting to is the first of those five years and so i will talk a little bit more about that but so we have two grant activities one is community development block grant funds and the other is the home investment partnership funds And one is mostly related to housing or rehabilitation and the rest is the other community development is based on construction or property acquisition and services. so as just mentioned every five years the city creates a five-year consolidated plan we finished that five-year plan was the end of year one and that's what we're reporting on today so in front of you today is year one caper i was in front of the previous commission just about three weeks ago on the annual plan for 2026 and so we're on year two action plan but on the year one reporting of the previous year so Bear with me, by the end of four years we'll have all those code words kind of completed. And so the plan goals that were identified in the 2025 Consolidated Plan as well as in the 2025 Action Plan included affordable housing, both stability and preservation, ending and preventing homelessness, basically services for very low income populations, and then public infrastructure, public facility improvements, and fair housing, which is a required activity. The funded activities that I'm reporting on today and the packet is in your packet and available online and it is a public hearing here today. It's to include activities that were just kicking off at the start of the year. So we haven't made a lot of progress. We have five years for that progress and we're just laying out the policies and procedures. So you might have heard us talk about an alley paving program. We're getting ready those policies and procedures just about getting completed and hoping to work with the engineering department to bid our first set of plans as part of the CIP towards the end of this year. So it took us about a year to get policies and procedures and all of the monitoring program activities set up before we just start spending money and the environmental review just began literally last week so that's going to be another probably six months of environmental analysis and then we do provide a grant to the public health department as they do their street outreach in neighborhoods and We have many more individuals besides the 33 that we serve, but the 33 meet that critical criteria as we define in the reporting. And then the operational support and ongoing outreach that we do as part of a partnership with Fair Housing and High Plains Fair Housing and Michelle Reese and her team. We have a Fargo specific staff person that works to support those people. And then another activity that we're getting ready to kick off this fall is working with our action agency in the tenant-based rental assistance program. We're right now setting up those policies and procedures, and as we get those policies and procedures set up, we'll be back in front of you to show you those details. And it's a very complicated process, but we're in, again, just finished the year one of getting the structure, if you will, to get that program set up. Other activities that happened last year, I should mention that we work with many different years at one time, so it could be up to four program years. And so pre-2025 action plan, we also did construction with Habitat for Humanity. We did three rental units with Elliott Place completion and finalizing. TWO OTHER APARTMENT BUILDINGS AND THEN WE DID COMPLETED THE HVAC SYSTEM IN THE YWCA AS WELL AS FINISHING UP WITH THE MOBILE OUTREACH UNIT WITH FAMILY HEALTH CARE AND SO THOSE ACTIVITIES PRE-2025 ACTION OUR CONSOLIDATED PLAN ARE COMPLETE NOW AND MOVING FORWARD WE WILL BE JUST ON THOSE THREE ACTIVITIES RELATED TO ALLEY PAVING TENANT BASE RENTAL ASSISTANCE AND STREET OUTREACH So glad to answer any questions. I know that was very quick, high level, and glad to, and it is a public hearing.

Anyone from the public like to speak to this? Anyone from the public to speak? Ms. Crutchfield, I'll point out that I appreciate the distinction of essentially we'll be at some point, we'll have four or five year plans all at once. And so understanding that this is different than the conversation you just had three weeks ago, I thought it was all tied together. But it's different points of each grant at different timelines, correct?

Exactly.

Thank you. All right, hearing, or seeing no one to speak to this, we will close the public hearing. Commissioners, is there a motion? So moved.

Second.

Motion by Commissioner Strand, second by Commissioner Gullixson. Any discussion?

Mayor?

Commissioner Strand.

Thank you. Nicole, I'm just curious. With this tenant-based rental assistance, not long ago you mentioned to us that there's 30 evictions per month in our community. Will this address that, or how do those dots connect?

Believe it or not, the federal government has about eight ways to find homelessness. and at risk of losing housing. And we are working right now with CENCA, Southeast, sorry, I can't think of their abbreviation off the top of my head, but the local action agency and the Coalition to End Homelessness and their interagency council to map the whole system. This system will be built to complement the whole regional system outside of that. But more to come on that exact income ratio that we're aiming for.

So evictions will be part of that radar? Yes. On their radar?

Yes. As well as stabilizing housing that people might have graduated out of that short-term immediate assistance and needing a little bit longer-term assistance.

Mr. Strand.

As long as I'm at it. There's one data point about our community that might fit here in this conversation, and that is, as I understand it, and this is older information, but it's still relevant today, 75% or three-fourths of our kids coming out of foster care are homeless the day they turn 18. So I would make sure we also have that group on this list of those needs that we're addressing in the community. And they probably already are on your radar. Thank you. All right.

Any other discussion, commissioners? Absent any more discussion, is there a motion? Or we had a motion, didn't we? In a second. All right. We'll move to a roll call vote. Thank you.

Strand?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Turnberg? Aye. Boucher?

Yes. Tuning on with Ms. Crutchfield at the podium, item number 32, a public hearing for the Renaissance Zone application for a rehabilitation project from EWR, Fargo Dakota Center, LLC, also known as Edgewood Properties, LLP, 377-F, located at 51 Broadway North.

Thank you. I thought I would as well highlight a few things that makes the Renaissance Zone program different than maybe other incentive programs. And so the Renaissance Zone plan comes up with a five-year plan. So the state has authorized us to develop a plan to meet the criteria of the Renaissance Zone authority or development plan and the authority. And that plan was adopted in 2024. It's updated every five to seven years. And it has been previously supported by the Fargo Public School District, Cass County, and the City Commission. And so we work all the applications that come in front of you. have met the criteria of those plans and go in front of the Renaissance Zone Authority as part of that pre-review. I'm gonna highlight the criteria real quick that we look at, and that is, and again, the purpose of the Renaissance Zone Program is to encourage reinvestment in downtown properties, which in turn strengthens the core and the community as a whole. It has both property tax and incentive tax benefits. And But the project must meet development plans, goals, objectives, and investment thresholds. And so the vision, there is a vision statement in the plan, and it very much marries up with the downtown and focus plan. When we did the update five years ago, three years ago, we made sure that was the intention. and the downtown of fargo renaissance zone is an economically vital culturally rich mixed-use district where there are well-designed public and private spaces for residents visitors employees employers and where an appreciation for the district historic character and natural amenities is paramount and so it just marries right up with a downtown and focus plan And so there is a project evaluation that the plan has to be based on renewal, investment, and redevelopment. And there are goals within the downtown and focus plan that become scoring elements on the applications themselves. And so, again, the objectives are economic development. There is actually a map and a plan in there that talks block by block on what those high priority land uses are. And then it talks about the urban design and street activation as it relates to that. So there is a minimum threshold criteria for commercial rehabilitation projects, and that is greater than 50% of the full entry value of the building, along with $40 plus in capital improvements per square foot, and then in residential rehab, greater than 20% of the full entry value and 25 plus in capital improvements per square foot, and then in new construction, $100 per square foot. So I just wanted to provide that overview, if you will. Usually I won't do that every time I have a public hearing in front of you. And so this project is probably the largest in scale, which we've seen in some time. It had a nice article in the paper over the weekend. And this is a rehab project at 51 Broadway North. And pursuant to the application, the intent of the project is to rehab the interior of the building to modernize to Class A office space including exterior updates and retail on the ground floor. The current property building value is $10 million and the proposed investment is $5,374,000 which exceeds the minimum investment threshold which equates to approximately $50 per square foot. The previous Commission always liked to talk about the tax information estimate and using the current mill levy as established, the future property value building taxes could increase from $160,000 to $240,000 annually once this project is completed. This is the building in sight that we're talking about. And the Renaissance Zone Authority did unanimously approve this. Staff has recommended giving it a positive score and we'd be glad to answer any questions as well as I believe the applicant is present.

Are there, is there anyone from the public to speak to this application?

My name is Paul Gley. I'm a resident of downtown Fargo. For a quarter century, North Dakota's Renaissance Zone program has been instrumental in revitalizing downtown Fargo. Projects must meet specific, carefully considered criteria to warrant approval. The question here is, does this proposal for the Dakota Center actually meet the criteria set forth in Fargo's 2024 Renaissance Zone development plan? With regret, I must say it does not yet. This building sits in the heart of the city, and for nearly 50 years, its blank white facades have made no contribution to walkable pedestrian-scale Broadway. That walkable pedestrian scale is what makes downtown work, and the current proposal makes no commitment to improve that. So how does the project fall short? Criterion 1C of the 2024 Renaissance Zone Development Plan says, thrives as a destination project should create a unique downtown experience for the vibrant sidewalks and public spaces nothing in this project will do that interior innovation is important but repairing the windows will not create a unique downtown experience Criterion 1E, complete our streets, calls for improving the pedestrian experience and increasing street activity. This project hints at a possible coffee shop and some tables on what has long been a forlorn forecourt. That doesn't seem to need a Renaissance zone subsidy. Criterion 1G, play with purpose. is intended to promote green spaces. This project offers an open space next to the building that, quote, could be used in a variety of ways, but there's no commitment that would require a subsidy. Criterion 3B calls for high priority land uses, such as retail. This project alludes to the possibility of retail, but nothing is specific in its plans. Finally, criterion five is the project representative of strong urban design principles. The project promises exterior improvements to lighting, storefront modernization, painting, and window sealing and repair. These have nothing to do with urban design, especially when there are no storefronts to modernize. Your decision will affect the heart of downtown for years to come, so I urge you to send this project back for more work to address these issues before approving it. Thank you.

Anyone else to speak to the application?

Good evening. My name is Jacob Strindon. I'm Associate General Counsel of Edgewood Real Estate Investment Trust. We're the parent company of both Edgewood Properties and EWR Dakota Center, excuse me. You know, we truly believe that this is a prime candidate for the Renaissance Zone. The building, unfortunately, is currently over 50% vacant and has been for nearly 15 years as far as our recollection goes. It's also recently fallen into somewhat of disrepair. And so the proposed investment that we're very happy to do is really about revitalizing a landmark building in downtown Fargo and continuing to see downtown Fargo thrive. Thank you. Mr. Turnberg.

May I ask, would you do this project without the Renaissance zone money?

You know, I can't speak to that. It would be a decision for the company, but I do not believe so, at least not to the extent of the renovations we proposed.

Aren't they already doing, starting on work inside the building?

There was some tenant improvements that began this spring that were proposed by and approved by the prior landlord or the prior owner. But the extent and the adequacy, I would say, of the improvements would not be the same without the Renaissance Zone.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else to speak to this application? Anyone else? With that, I'll close the public hearing. Commission, is there a motion? Commissioner Peterson?

Mr. Mayor, discussion? Discussions. Mr. Gley? uh... i'm sort of the same mind you are broadly speaking i'm very supportive of renaissance on projects i think they've worked i have personally been the beneficiary in the past but for one of the ones i owned was one of the very first projects in the renaissance zone uh... and maybe this is my fault don't know looking at our owner where do you go there we are representative maybe this is my fault for not engaging you more uh... in asking the questions similar to mr blight alluded to assert what your end goal your mission is Broadly speaking, again, Renaissance Zone is a positive. You can look around this downtown and compare themselves to, I always compare myself to recently as Anchorage, Alaska's downtown. Looks exactly like our downtown did today, exactly like our downtown did in 1980, because they don't have this methodology, they don't have this incentive, incentivization to make things better. But I need to find out what your real end mission is and not say that it's nefarious, right? It's just, I need a better vision of what you or I guess I should say the people you represent want to do with this building. Simply dumping a bunch of money into a thing and hoping it fills, I think that's venture capital and that's fine. But asking for our neighbor's money to do that action, I just need more detail. So again, I'm actually for this if I can have a better understanding of what you're trying or what your clients are trying to do. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Other discussion? Commissioner Gullickson.

I would echo the same, Commissioner Peterson. I like the idea. I'd really like to see this get done. I'd also like to see just a little bit more creativity to put into it. The concerns that you brought forth certainly are legitimate. Would your company entertain reworking it a little bit or bringing us more ideas or sketches or...

Yes, you know, I mean, we'd have to be a discussion, but I do think that we would be open to that. Certainly, even if we were to approve it, we want this to be something that we work together with the city and with the stakeholders on, certainly our neighbors in downtown Fargo as well. We do have Zerberg Architects on board with this, and so... Yes, a lot of the work will be done on the interior, but I do think that you'll all be very happy and impressed with what we're able to accomplish on the exterior as well. And I believe you do have some renderings as well, kind of showing some of those updates on the exterior. I would also say to Commissioner Peterson's point from earlier, we have had discussions with brokers throughout town, and there was interest in the building prior to our ownership as far as tenants. One of the issues that the prior landlord ran into was they had some cash flow problems and they weren't able to put the money into the building to bring those tenants back downtown. And the other concern that I will also touch on is we're a multi-tenant building. We've got about eight tenants in there right now currently off the top of my head. And our one concern that we had was wanting to retain those tenants as well and keep them in downtown Fargo and not move anywhere else.

Mr. Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Ms. Crutchfield, can you maybe remind us how, so I received multiple communications regarding this. I'm sure many of us did. Maybe we did, maybe we didn't. I think we did. Can you remind the commission, as well as our friends watching at home and those friends that we have here, how the taxation works? There's some preconceived notions that all taxation disappears in the Renaissance Zone. That's not the case at all. Can you walk people through that, please?

Yes, I will try and maybe bring Megan up from our team here. But so basically, it's a five years of tax abatement. And so that zeroes, it freezes, and then they do the work, and then it comes back on.

the important take away is that it does not go to a zero baseline right so the land value remains and accelerates over time this simply does not assess the new construction of the new work rights they still continue to pay taxes over time based on the current valuation it exempts the future or the the work that's being proposed right now that's the only thing that's exempt that's an important take away because folks talking to me did not realize that they had a myriad of conversations with me implied or otherwise it's thought they see an $800,000 number and they can, you know, none of us pay those kinds of taxes, right? We pay $3,000, $4,000 on our homes. So they saw that, they took that as this building will no longer pay taxes of any kind, will not pay taxes of any kind for five years. And that's not the case at all.

The other detail I'd like to ask the applicant is, and maybe he doesn't have the number offhand, but I do understand the property did transact recently and the tax value is declining as we speak. So it's declining literally as we speak and stand here. And so I don't know if you can speak to that as how that works.

Yes, absolutely. So we purchased the building in January for a little over $5 million. And as your team from the Renaissance Zone Committee project spoke to, it's currently assessed at north of $10 million. And so part of the reason why we bought the building and plan to make this investment is because we truly believe it will be worth $15 or more million by the time we're done with it and are able to identify and find qualified tenants. So to your point, yes, the goal for us is to obviously make money off of the building, but we view this as a mutually beneficial issue with the city of Fargo in that the city of Fargo will wind up with a larger tax base as a result.

Commissioner Strand.

Thank you, Mayor. Nicole, could you pull this slide up where you gave us a visual of what the tax revenues might be going forward, right there on the bottom? As I read this, the property value after the improvement will go from $160,000 to $240,000 annually. Is that a correct interpretation?

This is what I'll probably defer to Megan. I'll just introduce Megan Alshug from our team.

Good evening, Commissioners. Thank you for that question. So currently today, about $160,000 is what the taxes are annually on the structure. And so using the current mill levy and what the applicant estimates the future value to be, that is where we get about $240,000 annually. So then there's the difference of about $80,000 increase of taxes generated after the tax abatement comes off of the property.

So this is where my math gets muddled. I've never not voted for a renaissance project. It's one of the incentive programs I unequivocally support. Part of it is the short duration of it, not forever, up to 25 years. As I'm reading this number, this information, we're going to get $80,000 after the project, $80,000 a year increased revenue, property taxes. So that'll take us 10 years to recoup the 800 and some thousand dollar incentive offered to do the project. But the renaissance program is five years. So we have five years, then we have another five years. I guess where my head's at is I wish we would for the moment with this new commission put a hold on all incentives and all discussions and all actions coming to us until we've vetted them all completely and thoroughly. including Renaissance, to reaffirm, because I also don't support the idea of advertising that we offer incentives or programs and then reneging on them later, pulling the rug on their feet after saying, well, we do offer this. Then they let people qualify, and then we pick winners and choosers, as Commissioner Gehrig used to say. So this math isn't quite adding up to me, although I support the program, I support the intent to rehab downtown and our, our community. But to get ten years to recoup the, the, the incentive amount on a five year program, I just can't figure this math out.

And I would just say it's an incentive beyond just the financial. And so as the applicant said, trying to attract, we don't want a vacant building. We don't want a vacant building to further go and decline. That will end up with a downtown that's already kind of losing traction. And so you usually don't see me advocating for incentives like this, but the Renaissance Zone program, we have a master plan that has been adopted, it lays out the rules, it follows the century code, it lays out all the, it's completely discretionary on if you apply it or not, but with the plan in place, we're always gonna be advocates of a plan that's been adopted. If we need to revisit that plan, then in terms of tabling this or continuing or whatever you wanna do, we can go back and maybe that informational meeting and talk about what exactly does the Renaissance Zone program do or not. The next two projects, because the other one is similar, is after this agenda item, we are going to be seeing downtown vacant buildings, and that's going to be a dilemma that the public will be facing.

Mr. Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Commissioner Strand, to your point, I think that, and I'll look to my mayor, who is also a realtor, I think the baseline starting number is wrong. I think it's over-assessed. And I would not guarantee that with my assessment team, but my gut's telling me if... buildings valued right now at $10.686 million just sold for $5 million, I contend the $5 million is closer than $11 million. So the baseline of recovering the ROI, I think, is faster than what you're being told here. I also think the end value might be a little bit aggressive, too. I don't think you'll get to $16 million, but you'll get to some number value X more than we are now. And that's why I'm saying I simply just need more detail. I'm not... For this or against this at this stage, again, broadly speaking, Commissioner Strand, I'll reiterate what you said. I don't know that I've ever not supported a Renaissance Zone project. The ones that accelerated into the past five years, I wasn't a fan of, Commissioner. I think you may recall that. And Commissioner Turnberg, you'll probably recall that, too. But I think with more information, more detail, a little bit more thought, I think I'd be happy to support this. But right now, I'm just lacking... some data points for victory for not only yourself, but for your neighbors, as well as the taxpayers in general throughout the city of Fargo. So I hope you're appreciative of that. I'm not being critical, but that's sort of the reality I'm in right now. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Commissioners? Commissioner Golickson?

Is it possible to table this for a little bit, to buy a little bit of time? Would that appease Commissioner Peterson?

Let me ask our attorney, if we were to pause this, I mean, it's already gone through a process with a recommendation. So if we're pausing it for them to bring us back a renewed concept based on what they've heard from the dais today, does that change the application? Do they have to start the process over? What would that look like from your understanding? Or as you look to your colleagues?

Yeah. I think if the application is basically the same, there's getting more details to the commission. I don't think we'd have to go back.

To the RZ, is that the question? Yes. Yeah, and I was just curious. I couldn't remember if they closed the public hearing, and so I was...

They have closed it here.

Okay, yeah. Yeah, so I think in terms of process, if you just want to move this to another agenda item, we can do that.

Okay. I have Commissioner Strand and Commissioner Peterson.

A question. Tell me, remind me, who's on the Renaissance Zone Authority, and how do they go about vetting these projects? Because that's where the real sausage is made. We're just approving their recommendation or not, but how does that unfold, and who are they?

It's a robust group, a very dedicated... We love all of our boards and commissions, but I will say this one is the best in terms of understanding and indicating the higher value. And so you have Prakash Matthews, Dean Bershani. I'm trying to go off memory. Commissioner Grinberg. Commissioner Grimmer, he did not act on this one. He wasn't attending on this one. I'm trying to think if he was present for this case.

Yeah, we're blank on who was there, but it was a 5-0 vote. Oh, Deb Mather.

Commissioner Peterson. I'm good, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thanks. Mayor, do we have a motion on the table? We do not. I move approval to get formalized this. There's a motion.

I'll second the motion for discussion purposes. Commissioner Strand, anything to say?

No. Commissioner Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. I think what would reset the application timeline is a no vote right now. A tabling would not. i'm not an attorney and i'm not a planner but i think if we said no then we're starting over from scratch if we simply table it then we can continue allow our team internally to gather more garner more information for us some data points working with our owner and maybe some of our neighborhood friends to figure out what a positive thing this could be so that would require withdrawing the motion if we So, thank you Mr. Mayor.

Thank you. Any further discussion on the motion? Commissioner Strand.

Here's where I land. The project meets all state and local requirements for approval and is consistent with goals and objectives as established in the Fargo Renaissance Zone Development Plan. How can we not approve what we've asked people to do? As long as we're asking them and giving them the opportunity to do this, and we create the window to do this, and then at the very last 11th hour we, for some and maybe not everybody, we upset the apple cart. I just, I just think policy is where we need to be. And, and, and I'm, the policy at this point in my mind is clear this is allowable. It's been vetted. It's been approved. It's been recommended to us. It's consistent. I do think we need a conversation about incentives across the board, but that being the case, this is something we've told the public, we've told the applicants, you can do this. We offer this to you, we ask you to invest in our community. That's where I'm at right now, it qualifies.

Any further discussion? Commissioner Gullixson.

That's a fair statement from Commissioner Strand, and I will follow that. We have established policy. So I will support it.

Mr. Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. Commissioner Strand, I do understand, and that's why my suggestion was to table and gather information. So I will not be voting for this, and it's not because I'm against the Renaissance Zone or against this project in particular. I needed more information, no more, no less, and I, too, have been an advocate for this. Again, I participated. I can firsthand tell you we spent more money on the building we owned solely because of the Renaissance Zone. I'm struggling with information right now, and that's That's where I stand. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

And I'll speak to the comments related to potentially putting a pause on incentives and the desire to have a discussion on incentives. And I will say for the commission's awareness as well as the public, there will definitely be a very robust conversation this fall about incentives. A couple members of the Economic Development Incentives Committee has a desire to do that, both those that are on this commission and those from the public. There's also discussion about do we bring the Renaissance Zone under EDIC so that the same conversations, and as we look at building out incentives and measuring them and their outcomes, doing a much more thorough job of some of that is the interest of a lot of people, especially the public, based on what we heard this last spring. So I believe that's coming, and you'll be able to be a big part of that. Any further discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote.

Strand?

Yes.

Oshie?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

No.

Turnburg?

No. Motion carries. We'll go on to item number 33, or let's see, make sure I'm on the right one. Item number 33, a public hearing for the Renaissance Zone application for a rehabilitation project for JS2L Partners, LLP 378-F, located at 128th Street South. Ms. Crutchfield.

So this is another application for our rehab project. Pursuant to the application, the intent of the project is to rehab the interior and exterior of the building. The applicant is present if you have any questions for them as well. The current building values totaled $627,000, and the proposed investment is $1.3 million, which exceeds the minimum investment threshold and equates to approximately $135 per square foot. The tax information estimate using the current mill levy and estimated future property value, the building taxes could increase from $9,300 to $33,000 annually. This is the building location. VISUAL BUILDING CLOSE TO ISLAND PARK AND THE BOARD, THE RENAISSANCE ZONE AUTHORITY DID APPROVE IT UNANIMOUSLY AND STAFF BELIEVES IT DOES MEET OUR INTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS APPLICATION? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE Discussion or a motion from the commission? Commissioner Gullixson?

For the same reasons as the last one, I move that we accept this.

Motion, is there a second? Second. Seconded by Commissioner Strand. Discussion? Any discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote.

Gullickson? Yes. Strand?

Yes.

Peterson?

Yes.

Turnberg? No. Boshi?

Yes. Okay. Item number 34, requests for a new alcoholic beverage license classification. We'll let Mr. Wisher explain this, but this is coming from the Liquor Control Board as we look at the renovation and the expansion of the airport and a request from the airport authority. So, Mr. Wisher.

Thank you, Mayor. William Wisher appearing on behalf of this attorney's office and the auditor's office. A little background on why we're here today. So currently the ordinances allow one alcohol license to be designated specifically to the Hector Airport. For the past many years, a concessionaire known as Skydine has operated using that license. They have used an A license, which allows beer, wine, and spirits. No off-sale is allowed. There are no food requirements. As many of you are aware, the airport has expanded, and they desire to allow consumption of alcohol outside of the restaurant area, specifically in many of the gates. So the airport came to the Liquor Control Board and we've had numerous discussions with them on how this can be accomplished. We've identified a lot of things or options to make sure that the airport continues to be safe, but allowing the flexibility to consume alcohol outside of the restaurant. Some of the things discussed were types of alcohol sold, having a designated cup, limits on the types of alcohol or cups that could be sold, areas that no drinking would be allowed, hours, food requirements, and security. After all these meetings, the Liquor Control Board did approve the request to direct the City Commission to direct the attorneys to work with the auditor's office and airport on drafting a new ordinance that would better fit this request. So it's a hope today that the Commission would grant the motion. After that, I imagine there would have to be some additional discussions with the Commission on what things the commission wants to see in this ordinance. We could likely accomplish that in a brown bag meeting. I would anticipate that the airport would be prepared to present and ask or answer any questions that the commission has. After that, the city would be ready to draft an ordinance to achieve the commission's requests.

Thank you, Mr. Wisher. Is there a motion?

I so move. Thank you. second second thank you commissioner strand any discussion commissioners commissioner turnberg i would just like to say um now thank you commissioner strand i took over your seats with the airport authority and have been discussing this for quite some time but there are more than 40 airports that do this this is not a new idea bismarck already does it minot minneapolis st paul many of the places that Fargo applies to directly. And just like any establishment that serves alcohol, the servers already have training. This alleviates the pressure on the limited seating that we have even though we are renovating the airport. And you cannot board a plane intoxicated. So there really is, to me it doesn't seem like an issue. So if you were to overindulge, your vacation or your business trip is over. much like who watches golfers after the beer cart comes by to make sure that an underage person isn't drinking or they aren't overdoing it, or at a sporting event where adults are able to purchase a beer and a hot dog and watch a baseball game and sit with their kids. So I just think this has been way overthought, and it's just another amenity that we are allowing in our new airport and we would be one of more than 40 that already do it. Thank you.

Thank you. Other discussion? Commissioner Strand.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Commissioner Turnberg. They've been discussing this for a long time and part of the whole process of the airport expansion in every regard is to make it a user-friendly experience and that's what they're trying to do, but That said, I'm in favor of giving this a green light for the moment if it works. You know, I remember when we downtown were talking about people being able to carry drinks during like street fair, downtown events, the calls and the street fairs. And what we did at the, especially when COVID was going on, we gave them, let's give them a pilot opportunity to see how it works, try it for a year, make sure there aren't surprises or issues, and then if it goes as we expect, then we've gotten a step forward and we're all on the same page. I think that's where we'd land here, my guess is. But we've also had discussions, they've had discussions about what happens if there are public intoxication or to what degree is law enforcement involved. So here's what I would like to see, and it's not a formal requirement, but I think we should give them a try. I'm in favor of go to, see if it can work, make the best of it. But if it doesn't work, it's back at our table. to be revisited or tweaked or modified, especially if we're creating unintended consequences with regards to alcohol in a public setting. So I've been watching them and supporting them in this whole process, but I also have that caution in the back of my mind of we should always be prepared to back off a little bit if we encounter problems that we didn't see coming, especially alcohol.

Other discussion? just for clarification mr wisher or if we approve this tonight we're approving the giving the attorney's office the authority to go develop this to propose back to liquor control and up through the process or is this one and done and this is actually drafting it and what you put on paper is is complete we have some flexibility normally it doesn't go back to liquor control board it'd just be operating within the city commission but we'd be looking for advice on what

exceptions or terms need to go into this ordinance as soon as the Attorneys have that direction then we can draft it and it would come back to the Commission and then you would give your approval and if that had a sunset clause or or something in it That would be up to the Commission to direct to the Attorney's Office.

Thank you So for clarification tonight's vote is to authorize you to draft something to bring back to us. Yes to finalize. Okay, so Any other discussion? Commissioner Turmberg.

And I believe, too, the airport authority has done a lot of discussion on this and a lot of just checking it out, different scenarios. So I would be in full support of letting them lead the way, and we support this move.

Any further discussion? Commissioner Gullixson.

I'd just like to say thank you, Commissioner Turnberg, for sharing your thoughts. You answered several of the questions that were on my mind, and because of that, I would support this.

Thank you. Any other discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote.

Turnberg?

Aye.

Strand?

Yes.

Follickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Boshi?

Yes. All right, item number 35, a petition for waiver of requirement to install a public sidewalk in the Thunder Road South right away along lot one, block one of the Sanders addition, lot one, block one of Adams' ninth addition, all of lots 1, 2, 5, and portions of lots 3 and 4 of block 1 of Adams 5th edition, which are addressed at 2884, 2890, 2902, 3001, 3005, 3031, 3060, 3064, 3068, and 3075, Thunder Road South. Denial is recommended by the Planning Commission from their July 7th meeting. Mr. Kress from the Planning Department is here. Thank you, sir. Let me just move forward to that item here.

So item 35, as the mayor has stated, is a petition for waiver of sidewalk along portions of Thunder Road. Petitions for waiver of sidewalk don't come up very often. We get one about every two and a half to three years. So I don't believe, I don't know if anyone in this commission has seen one. Petitions for sidewalk waiver are reviewed by the Planning Commission. That recommendation then comes forward to the City Commission for a final decision, as it is doing here tonight. This is a non-hearing item at both commissions. So for the location here, this is I-29, 42nd Street, 32nd Avenue South, truck stop down here. Thunder Road Family Fund Center here. So this is Thunder Road here. And the zoning here. is a general commercial in the red, and these grayish-brown are light industrial, or limited industrial, rather. And these are the locations of those three subdivisions that the mayor stated in the introduction. So this was all once Adams' fifth edition, but parts of it have been replatted to Adams' ninth edition and Sanders' edition. The cross-hatched parts are not part of this. So it's this area here. There's the cul-de-sac here. There are some apartments over here. And again, more industrial over here. And this is the area of the proposed sidewalk installation. So as stated in the staff report, the proposal for sidewalk installation came from the city engineering department as part of their regular review of sidewalk projects every year. And you may have seen sidewalk projects going on all over town during the summer, perhaps even in your own neighborhood. That department notified the property owners of this proposal in the spring of this year. And some of the property owners brought forward a petition to waive that requirement. So these are the graphics that are in your packet. So this area here, the proposed project by the City Engineering Department would put sidewalk in all these areas that are outlined in red. The proposed area of waiver, that is the property owners adjacent to this have petitioned, the proposed area of waiver would be in the yellow. So if the waiver is approved, The yellow would not have sidewalk. This is some views of this. This is facing the cul-de-sac and Thunder Road here. And then we are facing along the east side of Thunder Road. Again, here's the Thunder Road amusement park here. And again, you see there is public right-of-way here. The petitioner's perspective, and this is in your staff report, is again that this is a cul-de-sac in an industrial area. It's not residential, and pedestrian traffic is very low there. The planning perspective is that this is actually in, this is an excerpt from our land development code, again included in your staff report. Staff looks at sidewalks as infrastructure. They're part of the overall public way, you know, from property line to property line, All the infrastructure is in there on the surface and underground. It's all part of the public way, all part of transportation, all part of an integrated transportation system as indicated in the excerpt from the land development code here. Included in your packet was a comment email from one of the property owners, Mr. Jones. And then your commission also had a lay-down item this evening, a single page, the other email that was received this afternoon from another one of the property owners there from Eddie and Barkas, the property owner for Eddie and Barkas. I know, Mayor, that a couple of property owners have signed up to speak tonight. Several of them are here. They may have signed up to speak. The Planning Commission's recommendation was for denial. It is stated in your staff report. It's shown on the screen. And this includes staff's presentation on this item. Thank you, Commissioners.

Okay. Anyone? Well, before we go there, I have a question for you, Mr. Kress. Yes, sir. So this area of the community has been developed for a while. I don't know how, at least... About 20 years. 20 years. I think we can use that number. So how did we get this far without sidewalks? Or why are they having sidewalks now versus 20 years ago or anywhere in between?

So yes, sir. So sidewalks are put in at the time of development, not at the time the street is built. So when these properties were developed, and I don't know that any of the original owners are part of this, the sidewalks just were never installed. I wasn't here then, I guess, is my answer. I don't know. Tom's not here tonight. Oh, oh, there. Oh, Mr. Knockmus. Mr. Knockmus, our city engineer, I think can help me answer that question, sir.

Generally speaking in new development areas what happens is that is when the streets and underground utilities go in sidewalk is not installed typically that happens with a site plan and So as engineering other departments are looking at site plans. I get submitted That's one of the things that engineering is looking at is ensuring that they're proposing to install sidewalk That's how this actually came to our attention if you kind of see that center block here, adjacent to 30th Avenue. As part of their site plan, they showed a sidewalk going around the west, south, and east side of their property. We discovered after this development went in that that sidewalk was never installed. And so we have, you know, there are a number of areas around town that do not have sidewalk. And so we have an annual program where we look to install sidewalk that's missing because in ordinance, each side of the street on every street is supposed to have a sidewalk. And so this got brought up by our project manager that leads those sidewalk projects at a pre-design meeting and mentioned, you know, the intent is to install it adjacent to the site where they didn't install it through the site plan. I noticed other missing sidewalk. Should we install it at that time? And so again, at the direction of myself and other leaders within the engineering department, we said, yes, now would be the time, you know, the economy of scale of doing all the work while we're there. And so that's kind of how it leads to this. But there are areas that are much older than 20 years around town that we still have missing sidewalk. And we try to address as many of those as we can on an annual basis while still maintaining a reasonable project size.

Thank you. So with a site plan, whoever the owner was at the time, specifically some of this yellow area, would have agreed to put in sidewalks at that time?

Yes, that would have been a permit condition of us approving their site plan permit.

And so there's no direct enforcement or an inspection that happens at that time of development that we would have caught it, or is that changed now with our processes?

There is not anything that's done by engineering department for inspection of sidewalk as part of a site plan. Thank you.

Commissioners?

Commissioner Turmberg?

I have had many, many conversations with the business owners in this area, and none of them that I've spoken with want this to go in. It's been 20 years and they function just fine without it. It is total industrial. There's a trucking business, which would almost be dangerous to have a sidewalk, a cul-de-sac in an industrial area, and then if you put it into a seasonal business, you're then forcing Thunder Road to maintain the sidewalk throughout the winter when they don't have business. So to me, this is just the city is us spending unnecessarily. It's going to be costing the business owners quite a bit of money. And I just don't think it's in a spot where people have expectations for sidewalk. There's no apartments or living in that area. And where the apartments are, there is plenty of sidewalk and accessibility.

All right.

Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak to this? I know we had two people signed up. Okay. We come to the podium, please. State your name and visit with us.

Well, thank you for letting me speak, Mayor. I guess I wasn't on the list, but she had a good point.

Would you state your name, please?

Oh, I'm sorry. My name is Jim McCoy. I own J&M Truck Sales, I-29 Properties. What Michelle said is very truthful. There's trucks coming and going out of my place all the time. I sell 400 to 500 semis a year. You get people pulling in, pulling out with trucks. You put kids there on bicycles, people walking up down the streets. People don't always look. I don't know if you've ever seen it. A lot of people, when they're on the sidewalks, they're on their cell phones a lot of times. And I sure don't need someone there getting hurt. The only people that really come and go through there are the homeless people. And it's on record. I've had my share of problems with them. Very seldom do I see people walking because when people go to Eddie and Barkis, they go between 5 and 8 in the morning. They drop their dogs off, they go to work. They don't want to walk their dogs down the sidewalk. They want to go home. The other businesses, same thing. You know, there's lots of trucks come and go. There's vans that come and go. That's a terrible place to put a sidewalk. So one night, I took a little time. I drove around. You go south of there, there's all them big apartment buildings. People are walking on the streets. I think that money can be well better spent than putting it there. Because, I mean, of everybody sitting here listening, everybody in the audience, how often do you see someone going up and down a sidewalk on their phone? 90% of the time, people are addicted to them. I don't want someone to get hurt. I've actually contacted City of Fargo. They did put a stop sign in. There's only two words I think best describes this, and this is just common sense. I don't want someone getting hurt at my place. People cannot stay off their phones. But other than that, like I said, there's a lot of places in Fargo that they could put sidewalks. People that come to our place aren't walking to our place unless they're a homeless person. They drive a car or pick up in, they drive a semi out. I mean, what really is the reason for sidewalks there? But thank you. Thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you, Mr. McCoy. We had a Mr. Tandeschi also sign up to speak. Are you present?

There you go.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. Thank you for letting me be here. I'm James Sandesky. I'm one of the four owners over at our family-owned small business of Thunder Road in Fargo. I respectfully ask the city to reconsider this project. I understand that sidewalks are an important public investment when they improve pedestrian safety and connect neighborhoods, schools, parks, and businesses. We fully support projects that generally improve public safety and benefit the community. However, I do not believe this location meets those objectives. As Michelle said earlier, we are a seasonal business. We are open from roughly April 1st through October 31st. That's going to add an extra burden of cost to us for snow removal or ice removal and so forth. I also respectfully ask the council to consider whether there's sufficient evidence demonstrating a need for the sidewalk. Has the city conducted a pedestrian safety study or a traffic study? Has there been a history of pedestrian accidents or documented safety concerns at this location? If those studies exist, I would appreciate the opportunity to review them. If they do not, I believe it is reasonable to ask whether this project is addressing an actual problem or simply following a plan without considering the unique circumstances of our property. Project could also create new safety concerns the sidewalk may encourage more pedestrians to walk near our entrance Where there is high traffic of trucks cars and so forth? As taxpayers we all want the city to city resources invested where they will have the greatest impact if funding is available for sidewalk construction I believe those dollars to be directed towards Locations where pedestrians trap pedestrian traffic is significantly higher If the council believes a sidewalk is still necessary I respectfully ask that the alternatives be considered Could the sidewalk stay on the west side of Thunder Road? Could an exception be granted because this is a seasonal business and I would also ask the council one simple question. If this sidewalk were not ready, already being proposed today, or 26 years ago, and you looked at this location with no existing plan, would you choose to spend taxpayer dollars here based solely on the number of pedestrians who actually use this area?

Thank you, Mr. Niederski. Anyone else to speak to this item? Anyone else to speak to it? Hearing none. Commissioners, is there a motion?

Mayor, I have a question, if I might. Yes. Who would pay for this sidewalk? If the waiver is denied, is this on the property owners, or would the city order it and then assess the neighborhood, or how would that work?

I'll let you ask. So all sidewalks are assessed to adjacent property. So what happens when we provide notice, landowners are provided two options. They can hire a licensed sidewalk contractor to install. And if they would not like to do that, we can add it to our city contract. And then it gets assessed. There are city portions of those projects that are city funded. So like on a residential property, a side yard is funded by the city. THAT PROPERTY DOESN'T HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. AND THEN ALSO THE ADA RAMPS, SO THE CURB CUTS LEADING TO THE SIDEWALK FROM THE STREET, THOSE ARE ALSO FUNDED THROUGH CITY FUNDS SALES TAX SELLERS.

I MAKE THE RECOMMENDED MOTION FOR DENIAL.

THERE'S A MOTION. Is there a second? I'll second. Discussion? Commissioner Trenberg.

Just to be clear, Commissioner Strand, is your motion to install the sidewalks in all the red or to waive the yellow?

My motion is to deny the request for the waiver, which means that everything as recommended by the city is where the sidewalk would end up being installed per our policies.

Thank you. Commissioner Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. I guess, so the logic in a sidewalk is conveyance of pedestrian traffic, no more, no less. I contend that pedestrian, and this was my question before the motion. The way I read this is, The red is going in regardless. The only waiver is the yellow portion, correct?

The only request is the waiver which is shown in yellow. So anything not shown in yellow would still be proceeding as part of our project.

Outstanding. My happy medium of a compromise, again, knowing that sidewalks are for conveyance of pedestrian traffic, would be to install curb cuts. And I don't have the graphics.

I feel like I should stand up here like I'm a teacher.

So yellow would be removed in its entirety. And on the southeast corner and the northeast corner, we provide curb cuts that access pedestrian traffic across to the parking lot. The logic being no more complex. If the parking lot's dangerous, we have people walking in the parking lot every time they park their car. This gets anyone who wants to walk to this space a safe means away from vehicle traffic to a corner that's going to be psychologically mindful with their drivers, we're all right, built into our nature to watch for people at corners when we're turning our vehicle, or should be anyway. It gets the pedestrians to the spots on either side, both north and south of Thunder Road, gets them across to where theoretically more pedestrian traffic, because I think we can all agree the properties to the southwest, the furthest or southeast furthest corner aren't going to have many folks walking to them, right? But you could make an argument that folks are walking from the apartments to Thunder Road. Well, that gets them there safely. So I guess my contention is my compromise would be sort of accept what the waiver's proposing, with the exception of adding conveyance structures across at each corner. So I'm not supporting the motion, but my happy medium is do what we're doing and then connect the property in a safe manner, getting mommies, daddies, and babies to that property, to their parking lot. ADA accessible curb cuts, both sides, pedestrian passage. There's my thought. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you. Any other discussion? Commissioner Gullixson.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm having a tough time thinking that we need to put this sidewalk in. It seems like money spent we just don't need to be spending. And I've been in a handful of meetings over the last two weeks that say that the Planning Commission itself really loves to have sidewalks in. And I understand that. But this... just doesn't seem sensical to me. So I am just really struggling with this. It seems like it's creating a bunch of undue burdens for several parties involved. One of the things that was mentioned to me when I asked questions was, well, yeah, this is how the land's being used today. It could be something else in the future. Well, then I think we need to address sidewalks in the future if this is set up differently then. I'm just really struggling with spending the money on either side for this. I like the idea of the curb cuts.

Commissioner Strand, and then...

But for the grace of God, there go I. You know, one of these days, a few weeks ago, I got injured, and I could be in a wheelchair today. And what happens when that happens? That you're the one that's trying to ambulate and get through a part of town, and you don't have access and availability, and you're out mixed with the traffic. You may be one in how many thousands of people that that's your mode of transportation. You're in a wheelchair. But we have to remember those folks that are vulnerable and those folks that don't have the wherewithal and the blessings. I'm really concerned about safety and the vulnerable populations. We mentioned 14-year-old and under kids. I'm worried about the people who are disabled and what are we going to do to help them or are we going to just put more barriers up in another part of town by saying, well, we're not going to do it for you there. That's my issue. It's not a big population. It's a priority. It's taking care of everybody, all people.

Mr. Trenberg?

No, I just will reiterate, I'm glad it's not my business. I wouldn't want to spend another $12,000, $20,000 out of pocket for a sidewalk where there aren't people and pedestrians walking. It just doesn't make sense to me. And I think it's a happy medium where you have populations and people living. You have sidewalks, the apartment buildings. In the middle there, those are shop condos, I believe. So that's not housing. And Thunder Road has been there for 20-some years, and I don't know that I've ever heard of an accident with a pedestrian. But to me, the happy medium is to allow the waiver.

Any further discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote. And for clarification, the motion was to deny the waiver for the sidewalks. So it would require, if this passes, it would require the property owners to install the sidewalks. Ms. Bellman?

Strand?

Yes.

O'Shea?

Yes.

Gullickson? No. Peterson?

No.

Turnburg? No.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Motion fails, so we need another motion.

Mayor, I think we still need to have a vote on whether it's going to be a correct.

I'm working on it. Mr. Peterson. Mr. Mayor, thank you. My motion is to do what I had recommended as a happy medium, and that means installing... allowing the variance to go through with the exception of it talking to commissioner strands point uh... allowing those folks that may need that bit of help across the street those additional curb cuts and i think my engineers can take care of those much better than i can speak about the right but you understand what i'm getting at right we're talking about eighty accessible curb cuts on both sides of street along conveyance of pedestrians get to the parking lot safely and i can help clarify i guess i don't know how to do this other than So the southeast corner is the easy one. I'm trying to get people to Thunder Road on both north and south. So that's where my second curb cut is south of. So it would be 2852. That second curb cut would be on the southern portion of that, if that makes sense, on the east side of the road. Right here, sir. And I know this is a nightmare for you.

My secretary.

Yes, sir. Bingo. So you've got an avenue on both sides of the property. Again, simply curb cut intersection. Gets them across safely on both cases. And then we can worry about future access, I suppose. I guess it's taken care of without this variance. So that gets our friends and neighbors that may need some help across to that property. Commissioner Strand, you are 100% correct in the terms of from 3004 all the way down. That's where you're right. I don't disagree with you there, but I think that would be, if I was an owner of those properties and I had clients, I liken this to ADA stalls. Whether the ADA existed or not, if you do not put ADA handicap van stalls within the parking lot that you're designing, you're a fool because you're ostracizing that portion of your clientele. If the groups, let's pretend 1304 becomes something that's more family-friendly, say it's a pizza restaurant with a big playground, those people would be, I think, encouraged and then willingly put in a sidewalk because that's their customer base. They're going to get there. Anyway, so that's my motion. That's my compromise. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Before you make a formal motion, can staff respond? Withdraw my motion. Mr. Nakmus?

So I don't want to disagree with our city attorney here, but I don't know that a motion is necessary. Again, ordinance states sidewalks shall exist everywhere, right? And so we already have these components as part of our project. With the vote that just happened, what it said is we're going to take off the area that that Donald is showing here in the image on the right in yellow. Beyond that, I think we can use our engineering judgment to determine what the right locations for ADA accessible ramps and things like that are.

Does that satisfy you, Commissioner Peterson?

Mr. Mayor, yeah. If the commission's happy with that, I'm happy with that.

Commissioner Strand.

My question is this, is what do we do the next time somebody wants a waiver? And at what point do we decide that our policies are not solid and that they're that flexible that on the whim of electeds we may change tomorrow or the next day? I'm just wondering. I like to be driven by policy and have policy drive our actions. And we're deviating from our policy. I think we're recommending deviating from our existing policy that says there shall be, for these reasons, sidewalks.

And I could maybe just say this part. So again, ordinance is quite clear here. It provides guidance for the fact that sidewalks shall be installed along all streets, both sides of the street, but then does clearly highlight the waiver process. And it also states in that waiver process, and I don't have it available right now, but Future City Commission can make that determination at a future date that sidewalk shall be installed. And so ordinance does clearly state that, that it gives the authority to City Commission to change their mind and install sidewalk at a later date. And so that might be the case of adjacent land use changes or there are complaints of lack of sidewalk or whatever it might be, City Commission could make that change.

Commissioner Tremberg.

I just wanted to agree with you, Commissioner Strand, that we want to follow policy, but our policy also includes the waivers. So, in fact, we are following policy by allowing the protest to take place. So I think this is a good compromise and being sensible.

Thank you. All right. Based on that, we will move on to item number 36.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Thank you. Hearing on an appeal regarding vehicle removal notice, administrative notice, and order to correct at 379 Seventh Avenue South, Mr. Radnick from the Inspections Department is here to speak.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. I'm here to talk about the tonos that we've actually issued to a Ford RV at 379 7th Avenue South. Just for background, on June 19th, the inspections department was conducting an inspection at a multifamily residential unit because of complaints, and we observed that there was a Ford RV that appeared to be damaged on the property, and it was just sitting out in the open. We took pictures of it and discussed it in the office, and it looked egregious enough to allow us to On June 23rd, 2026, we did post that tow notice and sent out the notices as the ordinances require and gave them the appeals process. On June 29th, Doug Hanson, the owner of the RV, did make a formal appeal to the commission. And that's where we are here tonight. Just to highlight a few things from our perspective, in 130901 definitions, that is the ordinance we use for junk vehicles, the term junk automobiles shall include without limitation. The first part of it is just for licensing. The second part where I have it highlighted here is whether licensed or not any motor vehicle which is inoperative for any reason for a period in excess of 15 days, which this RV is clearly inoperable for more than 15 days. Also in 1309.02, the storage of junk and accumulation does include junk automobiles, as I have highlighted, and it prohibits these items to be stored upon any private property within the city of Fargo. It is deemed a nuisance and tends to result in blighted and deteriorated neighborhoods, the increase in criminal activity, the spread of vermin and disease, and is contrary to the public peace, safety, and general welfare of the community. Again here, because this vehicle was stored outside, we have 130904, which makes it unlawful to dismantle an automobile except on a business premises. And it clearly states in there that you cannot dismantle or work on a vehicle outside. Prolonged if you're changing your oil or something, and it's outside. That's nothing that anybody's going to report But if you're you have a prolonged vehicle sitting there, and it's being worked on it's clearly being worked on We prohibit that and lists inside of a building or part of a larger commercial establishment and 130907 is the actual ordinance that we use to be able to remove these vehicles so that's when we take them for tow and give the owner 15 days to either show us that it's an operable and licensed vehicle or a remove it themselves. With that, here's some pictures of the RV that we were taking for tow. As you can see, it looks rough, but just from these pictures, you can't really tell that it's not operable, other than the building materials that are behind it. But when you look at the front, you start to see that this vehicle has been inoperable for quite some time, although it is licensed. After speaking with the police department and stuff, too, there are essential things on the front of this vehicle that are not present and would not allow it to be driven down the streets at this time. The owner of it does state that he wants to repair it, but again, the repairs are happening outside. They're not happening inside as they should be to protect the vehicles and the people around, and our recommended motion is on the screen. We'll stand for questions.

Any questions for Mr. Radnick?

All right.

Commissioner Strand.

Thank you. I remember another instance in South Fargo where a yard was full of vehicles, but I had the impression it had to be complaint driven or that our sense was we were complaint driven. Was this a complaint that created this action?

Initially, the inspection of the multi-unit property was from a complaint from one of the adjacent property owners. We went out there to investigate it, and during those investigations, we look at the full property as well as everything else that is going on with the property on the premises, and this is one of the things that we found.

They specifically complained about the vehicle?

Not the vehicle, but the property itself.

Mr. Peterson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Within our correspondence, and I've not re-read it here, but within our correspondence there was some claim of disability. I'm sure you're aware of that. I don't want to get into particulars. It's a public record, I suppose, but is there any validity to that? Again, I don't know the gentleman. I don't know the family.

Just for point, the individual plans to speak and is online. Oh, wonderful.

Okay. So I'll let the gentleman, I'll let the owner talk to that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You bet.

Any other questions for Mr. Radnick before we turn over to Mr. Hanson? Hearing none. I believe, Mr. Hanson, I heard you online for your notice. Since you're not in the room with us, just know that there's a two and a half minute speaking period, and you'll hear a beep when you have 15 seconds left. So the floor is yours, Mr. Hanson.

Good evening. My name is Deb Schaefer, and I am assisting Doug with the appeal of this notice labeling the RV as a junk vehicle and unrepairable. Doug has been actively working on this, and so far he has repaired several major components such as the starter, the alternator, the power steering pump, the brake master cylinder. He's replaced tires, and he is currently working on the engine wiring. Unfortunately, his progress has been slowed by his disability, his limited financial resources, and his ability to locate the parts for this older model RV. Definitely not due to neglect, though. These repairs demonstrate his active maintenance and consistent effort to return the RV to working condition. I did send some pictures in with the appeal. Unfortunately, I'm having technical difficulties, so I'm not able to provide those to you. But once again, there were pics submitted to show what he has done so far as far as repair. He has invested every spare dollar into this RV. It's not causing harm to anyone, and he simply just needs time, the financial flexibility, and understanding to complete repairs at his own pace. For this reason, we respectfully request an appeal of the junk vehicle designation. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you, and I believe it was Ms. Schaefer. For your knowledge, we did receive those photos, and a written narrative was part of our packets. We did receive those. Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Strand.

I would like to ask the owner's representative how much time would be needed to accomplish this effect or not.

it's hard to state that because he's financially doesn't have the funds so he just repairs one piece at a time so he's unsure what is needed to complete the repair i know the wiring was the biggest part of it so he's currently working on to repair that part of it any other questions for the owner's representative commissioner gullickson

Thank you, Mayor. Question for you, ma'am. Once this vehicle is running, is it possible to be moved to another location to continue the work?

Well, he's a renter there, so I don't know where he would move it to. He doesn't have the funds to house it anywhere else. I understand that the neighbors don't like the look of it, but he can't help that he can only afford so much. So that's unfortunate. He's just trying to make repair for what he has.

Thank you.

Mr. Strand.

I'm sorry. May I add that he is a renter there, so he should have a parking space available. He does not own another vehicle. This is just an RV for him, so.

Thank you.

His leisure.

Mr. Strand?

Mr. Radnick, I'm just curious, if we were to enact this, what would the cost to the owner be to remove this vehicle and to accomplish this?

We do have a contract. I couldn't speak exactly to the dollar amount, but we do have a contract with FM Towing. They would just come in and tow the vehicle, and then it would be the owner's responsibility to get it back, and they just have to pay their applicable fees. I'm not 100% sure how much it would be for an RV like this.

Commission, is there a motion?

Mayor? I move we give them three months. And either it's addressed and satisfied by then, or we, at that point in time, direct our staff to remove the RV and they've had adequate notice.

I would second that.

Okay, so there's a motion and a second to allow the owner of the RV three months. Do you want three months from today? Okay, three months from today, so 90 days. That's what you're saying? Okay. Commissioner Turnberg?

Who's just going to second? Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, so there's a motion and a second. Any discussion on allowing the RV owner to have 90 days to have the vehicle repaired and moved?

Mr. Mayor, may I ask a clarifying question?

Yes.

Within the 90 days, do we have to re-tow notice the vehicle after the 90 days, or at the end of 90 days, are we towing the vehicle?

I would say in 90 days, if it's still there, you tow it.

Mr. McLean. So I think Commissioner Strand's motion would be to accept the findings of staff, deny the request of appeal, and direct staff to remove the Ford RV located at 3797th Avenue South if it is still there in 90 days and has not been repaired. Thank you.

Commissioner Golickson, are you okay with that amended language?

Mm-hmm.

On advisement. Thank you. All right. Any further discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote.

Durand?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Turnberg? Yes. Boucher?

Yes. Motion carries. We will go on to item number 37, which is a bid award and contract for fence installation around the east lot of the Fargo Police Department headquarters, PBC 26237. This is continued on from our July 6, 2026 regular meeting. And we have Ms. Majerus here and Chief Stefanowicz.

Good evening, mayor and commissioners. Tonight we will be presenting additional information regarding the request for a security fence at the Fargo police headquarters. First, I'm going to turn it over to chief Stefanowitz to discuss what precipitated this request.

Good evening, mayor and commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to give you a brief overview of the information included in your packet about this request. Um, if you remember when we, the city of Fargo first acquired the building that we're in, it was a business. And as part of that business, for us to occupy that, there was a number of improvements that needed to be made. A number of those improvements were spread out over time, and a few of those involved security improvements along the way. So after we occupied the building, there was a number of those improvements that started underway. There was a number of number of different improvements that would need to take some time as related to funding and other initiatives and we had to prioritize. So what highlighted this once again for us is we began a PD master facilities plan. As part of that master facilities plan there was two firms that we used one was a local regional and another is a national both experts in their field as it relates to public safety facilities and they both noted deficiency as it related to security and RELATED TO OUR PARKING LOT. THIS WAS AGAIN HIGHLIGHTED IN 2025 THROUGH OUR EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SURVEY WHERE EMPLOYEES NOTED IT AS A PRIORITY AND AS PART OF THAT WE ALSO FOLLOWED UP WITH EVERYBODY IN PERSON NOT JUST FROM THE SURVEY BUT IN PERSON TO LISTEN TO SOME OF THE STORIES OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED OVER TIME. So on the next slide, you'll see some information as kind of some of the general overview of that. 38 documented instances just over the last year. Again, just trying to put some data to the information that we're providing here today. So that's July 25 to July 26, 38 documented incidences. Interestingly enough, after the discussion at our last commission meeting, the next day we had a person in full ski masks, sunglasses, and gloves out amongst our vehicles in the parking lot. So it is something that does happen quite frequently. I believe that if you were to look at other events, Departments within the city the volume in which we encounter something like this is much higher and probably we become a target inside of all this so another issue for us is that as part of all since 2024 as part of our as part of our daily operations we had to start booking and releasing from the police department and since 2024 we've done over 400 book and releases which again we're releasing people directly out into the area in which we occupy, which of course creates some issues for our folks. So the behaviors that we're documenting and showing are certainly part of national trends where there are some unsavory individuals that may or may not have nefarious intent. And with that, we are looking to upgrade our security as it relates to our facility and our parking.

So this slide actually shows the parking lot as we are intending to do it with this project. However, I'm going to move to the next slide. And this shows the ultimate goal is to vacate 24th Street North, which is in progress right now but has not taken place. And it is to secure the lot as a part of a campus. So you can see the two red arrows indicate the gates. right here and down here that would provide access. And then we would secure it to the fence on the north side and then also on the south side to the building. And that would secure this parking lot to the headquarters building and provide safe passage for the employees to their vehicles. Again, this is a project that has been approved to be funded by the 2024 bond issue. There is a deadline to complete this, and unfortunately, we cannot wait for the vacation of 24th Street North. So going back. Hopefully I can go back. There we go. So going back this shows the plan at this time and you'll see after talking with the chief we made a couple of changes but on the north side this yellow section would be eight foot galvanized chain link with rows of barbed wire and black privacy slats and AND THEN ALONG THE EAST SIDE, ALL THE WAY ALONG THIS EAST SIDE WOULD BE THE EIGHT FOOT STEEL FENCE WITH CURVED TOP PICKETS. THERE ARE PICTURES IN YOUR PACKET THAT SHOW HOW THAT FENCE IS CONSTRUCTED. MAN GATE THAT THE OFFICERS WOULD USE WHEN THEY LEAVE THEIR VEHICLES TO GO TO WORK AND THEN THERE ARE THE TWO GATES AGAIN TO ACCESS THE PARKING LOT. Now, when the vacation is completed, let me go back to this, we have verified with the vendor that all of the fence that is along the east side of this parking lot here can be repurposed with the exception of the posts, which are set in concrete. So we can reuse the gates. We can reuse the fence panels. to complete the final plan for the fencing. So the vendor stated 60 to 70% of those materials can be repurposed to get to that final goal. So that is the makeup of the fence and also the justification and the motion is on the screen.

Thank you, Chief. And Ms. Majerus, questions? Commissioner Gullixson, then Commissioner Turnberg.

Thank you. Could you speak to where the money comes from? It appears it's from a 2024 bond. Is that right? Is this a use it or lose it? Or the money is already simply allocated for this project?

I'm going to have Susan come up and speak to the bond issue.

Hi, yes. So we issued a bond in 2024. As we're closing it out, a lot of the projects came in less. So we do have funds available. As we were looking at capital projects, knowing that our budget was tight, anything that was a high priority, we wanted to use those funds, which would then free up our capital funds for other projects. So that is the opportunity that we have in front of us.

And if we don't use it for this, then it goes unused, or we have something else?

We can reallocate it, but there's kind of a tight definition of what it can be used for, the bond proceeds. It needs to be something facility-related.

Okay. Just a couple more quick questions, if I could follow up. Currently, do the police have a program where they can walk, say, female employees to their cars? The perspective on this is I used to work at Blue Cross Blue Shield and we had vast parking lots, no fences. So they would often offer that to female, but that was years back. And now you guys nationally are a bit of a target and I would be concerned for your safety. So I'd like to hear your perspective on that.

Certainly we have employees coming and going at all hours of the day both civilian and sworn the building isn't always Occupied by sworn members, so they're out on calls for service throughout the entire 50 square miles of the city So getting somebody to come back to escort somebody while not impossible Certainly proves difficult when they're dealing with emergency calls especially late in late in the evening Thank you.

Mr.. Turnburg

Excuse me. I have a couple of questions. What is the holdup or the delay for the big vacation of 24th Street?

I'm going to have to bring up .

It's a street. It's not a building, Becky.

Try to circle back to that image. SO AS WAS MENTIONED, 24TH STREET IS A PUBLIC STREET DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC FOR THEIR USE. AND SO IN ORDER TO VACATE, IT HAS TO BE A PUBLIC PROCESS. AND SO AS THIS ROADWAY GETS VACATED, THERE HAS BEEN SOME CONVERSATION WITH THIS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER BECAUSE THE WAY IT WOULD WORK IS THAT HALF OF THE STREET MIDPOINT OF THE STREET AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE EAST SIDE OF THAT WOULD GO TO THIS ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. WE WOULD HAVE TO ACQUIRE THAT LAND FROM THEM AND LIKELY PROVIDE AN EASEMENT TO THEM. THERE'S BEEN SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THAT LAND OWNER. THEIR INITIAL REACTION WAS, WELL, YOU SHOULD JUST BUY MY ENTIRE PARCEL. THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE THE NEED FOR THAT. AND I WOULD SAY THOSE CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN PUT ON HOLD AS THIS KIND OF CHANGE TO FENCING IN the parking lot on the east side. And so we haven't pursued those conversations anymore.

Thank you. I also want to just add that this has been on the radar for the two years that I've been on the commission. And I've had numerous police officers reach out to me about this. They've been talking about it for the two years I've been on the commission. We have the luxury of secure parking when our parking garage was under construction. I didn't really enjoy going out walking to my car by myself after a late meeting. When I worked at the television station, we also had secure parking for people coming and going. And the city has also put the resource and recovery center right next to your headquarters, which also has a lot of mental health crisis, people who may be dealing with mental illness, and also drug users. So we put that right next to your building. I think you're totally, we should put the fence there.

Mr. Peterson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Chief, I don't dispute any of your stats. I don't dispute anything you're saying regarding your staff and potentially being more of a target than others. I was informed as I ducked under this rope I was supposed to walk up that little ramp there and zigzag my way across here for my own safety. The reality is if someone wants to hurt me, they're going to hurt me, right? Once I leave the property proper here, If I'm a target, I'm a target, much like you and your team members, much like every employee within City Hall. If someone wants to do harm, the uncomfortable reality is harm will be done upon you. This is about asset allocation. I realize it's a bond. My struggle with that is that apparently if we've issued a bond, and again, I haven't walked through the logic of this. I actually started running down a rabbit hole after our last meeting trying to find what this bond is, what the interest rate is, and all that. And I think we'll talk more in detail about that during our budget hearings. Typically what happens, a bond is issued simultaneously. So it's my understanding we've been sitting on a bond, this cash, paying interest on it since it was issued, correct? Yeah. So here we sit for two years paying interest on money that we're not allocating. This has been before the commission, is my understanding. And for whatever reason, the commission prior to our sitting up here said no. The city is financially fine. We're not going bankrupt. Nothing's burning down. Buildings aren't tipping over. We're not smashing cars into barriers because they can't run because we're running 20-year-old vehicles. But the principle I stand with is still sound. this is about asset allocation if i have a quarter million dollars that gets me one fully trained officer equipped for one year now i realize revenue stores right it's a bond it's not paid over an annual basis just paid overtime but there's no money printing machine downstairs all of this is general fund revenue however we get there whether it's over ten years or whether it's over a year we're gonna spend a quarter million dollars on offense Meanwhile, we have hundreds of other employees, all of whom could potentially be targets. Are they? No, but maybe. What do we do about everyone else? And Commissioner, to your point, what about the citizens at large? If our friends who were adjacent to precast concrete building basically built like a bunker full of off and on armored and armed individuals trained to protect the citizens at large, if you're concerned, what about literally everyone else? So while I appreciate what you're doing, it's probably going to pass four to one, and that's okay. I struggle with asset allocation, and I think once we get into the budget even further, you'll find more of that from me. So with that, that's my commentary. Thank you all. Mr. Strand.

Thank you, Mayor. Chief, I'm just wondering, your predecessor was informing us that we would be needing a new police headquarters at some point in time. And I interpret that that means we'd have to move from this current location. Is that still the discussion and or with this opening up a 24th there and this expansion of our footprint, does this give us more flexibility in our current location to address future facility needs there? Or is that still inevitable that we'll be moving our headquarters?

not necessarily moving the headquarters but we absolutely need a substation of some kind in the southern most portion of the city we definitely have a great space inside of there it wasn't specifically built for the police department so again we're having some growing pains with inside of that but however As part of the public works being adjacent and the campus idea, there's a number of things that work really well for us in that space. But we have to address the southernmost portion of the city with a substation or some facility of some kind.

Mayor, I advance the recommended motion.

Second. There's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll do a roll call vote.

Strand?

Yes.

Collickson? Yes. Peterson?

No.

Turnburg? Yes. O'Shea?

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you. All right, we'll move on to item number 38, a presentation on city staff roles related to future incentive processes and procedures. And as the team's making its way up here, I just want to thank the team in finding ways to reallocate this important work. And as we alluded to earlier in a little side conversation I had with Commissioner Strand, is this is kind of set in the the set in the foundation for the ongoing fall discussion around incentives in general. So Mr. Redlinger, Ms. Crutchfield.

great thank you mayor commissioners a good evening and will be a brief in our comments tonight we have a brief presentation but just wanna highlight that we're really going to undertake a comprehensive review of all of our incentive policies at this time this really two reasons for that number one we're really uh... key retirement in the city organization when mister gilmore who uh... was served in the role of strategic planning and research but also and perhaps importantly most importantly, is that we're doing our LDC update. It's a real opportunity and it's one that was contemplated about two years ago that we would do just what we're doing now, which is to really challenge ourselves to think about the future, think about what kind of incentives and tools we really need to embrace in Fargo and how we measure their success for Fargo. So what we have tonight is a brief presentation on the LDC, but we also included in your cover communication just a broad overview of both The pilot incentives, those things that are approved locally through our EDIC, and then they're also approved by the city commission. But then also some of those other matters that we work with other partners like the Economic Development Corporation. So we've got a variety of tools at our disposal today, but this is really about the future. This is really about preparing for that future that we want to see together collaboratively with you as our leadership team. So I'll turn it over to Nicole. She's got a few slides, and we're happy to answer any questions you might have at the close of this presentation.

Thanks, Michael. And just to highlight, this is a teaser for an informational meeting in mid-August. We're still working with Diana as part of that. And just wanted to highlight and maybe demystify how the incentives and the land development code are tied to the growth plan and future incentive processes. As in your memo, our office will be handling future TIFs and pilots. applications until applications as a result of the economic development incentive committee process and we'll be bringing those in front of you working very closely with the finance department and the assessor's department as we work on different different types of incentives and so as mentioned at the budget meeting earlier today and also there's many different plans and master plans as they all tie into each other This is just an example and a strategy of how each plan ties into the other, starting with the Go 2030 as that big overarching strategy and then drilling down into the Land Development Code and over the course of the last 11 years really tightening it into the goals we have. So the growth plan began in 23. and adopted in 24. There were lots and lots of public activities and engagement as part of that, and it really does hold that master plan vision for future growth. And you saw some of that demonstrated in the last meeting of the previous commission on the Lost Creek application. And so what the growth plan does is highlight the steady growth that the city has, you know, since the 60s has been really steadying over time, a nice gradual trajectory upwards, and those intentions for future growth Really shifting some of that growth strategy to include more incentives as it comes to infill and redevelopment of our older cities as they become maybe a little tired and up for market renovations. And then the part three is really that framework for practical growth. And so this is really where we're at as part of the land development code. And how did we distinguish between by-right development and optimal growth? And step four, chapter four, is really about the implementation of that. And again, that's where the financial incentives comes in. And so zooming into that chapter four, our growth plan says that we're gonna be doing a new land development code. We'll be looking at financial and economic development practices. And that will be having enhanced coordination with our public infrastructure and facilities. And so really that's where we're at today. And if you look at the very last page of the growth plan, you'll see a seven to 10 year layout of roles and responsibilities as it comes to implementing that. And that's really, to my mind, the most important part of the growth plan is how we iteratively learn and evolve. And we are really literally up here this quadrant as we proceed on the first phase of that land of growth plan implementation and so just putting it all together we're looking at transects these transects tell you what part of the city if you're doing uh suburban development urban development edge uh agrarian development step two is the type of land uses that we are looking at and those are called place types step three if you're in the white right quadrant as are is infrastructure readily available to you and then step four this is really where the incentive starts to tie in is the uh growth centers if you will so these dots this is a really zoomed in version but our zoomed out version but these dots represent How do we bring resources and incentives to encourage higher density development that's optimal in nature. And so the task in front of you, our planning commission, the public, is how do we define optimal? In our growth plan, we had many surveys, public processes, voting, et cetera, to talk about what optimal development means to them. There's a chart in the growth plan that talks about kind of on a scale of one to 10, how do we fall on that and what do we want to be? And then that step five is really how we test those incentives and goals. So in late August we'll have our consultant with us to help us define what we've learned today and as we analyze the past use of incentives, the return of those, and some of the challenges we're having in measuring the benefits of incentives as they apply to parcels over time. And so we'll see what your appetite is and the public's appetite as we define those optimal developments. And so again, right now we're focusing, we have two trajectories going on and I'm gonna skip ahead a little bit we have really two pathways going on. We have the land development code, that's your by-right development, that's on the left-hand side of the chart, and then on the right-hand side of the slide is the incentives and optimal development. And so teasing out a mid-August informational meeting with the city commission, that's also about the time we'll be publishing our 80% public public view of the land development code draft. Still much work to do on how to build those consensus with that. Late August we like to see a joint planning commission and city commission meeting. with our consultants present. And then in September, really understand where those sticky points are and the consensus needs. There's a lot of varying opinion, if you will, on what our future should be and how to drill into those regulations, as well as meeting some roundtables and discussions with the financial folks that are in the banking and industry of building land. And then combining, again, the discussions about combining our Economic Development Incentive Committee and our Renaissance Zone, that was direction set by our previous commission. This commission may have different discussions as part of that. And then on the left, land development code, we're hoping to begin that public hearing process in November. And then on the right, related to incentive development, that will be forthcoming after we get the land development code adopted. So first we need to know what that baseline is gonna be, and then what is that optimal development in relation to that land development code. Meanwhile, it is kind of messy as we're in between these stages, just as like that first initial renaissance zone. There's a lot of discussion and moving pieces, and so there's the existing methods of how we use things today, and then there's the future goals of what we're trying to accomplish. And so we appreciate your patience over time, the public's patience, and this is all an iterative process. And so we may learn things along the way that have us challenge this timeline or challenge what we want to discover and needs and that's all flexible. So just wanted to pass that forward.

Thank you. Any questions or comments, Commission? I know it's getting late. Thank you for your work. I think that helps summarize kind of what we can look forward to in the fall. There's obviously an appetite not only from this Commission but also the public to have these conversations. So appreciate it. Thank you. Commission, I do apologize for you. I'm looking at it, and it's five minutes after seven, and I never asked if you wanted a break earlier. So consider that a rookie mayor mistake, but we'll have red cards in the future you can hold up if we need to do it. So if you can hang in there for a few more minutes, we have a couple more updates, and we'll turn it over to Mr. Nakvus from our engineering department to talk about some construction updates.

Good evening again. Maybe just a little bit of background. A number of years ago, I believe it was Commissioner Strand that asked engineering to provide regular updates to City Commission on our construction projects. And so we do that roughly once a month throughout the construction season. So I'm here in July to provide that update. First of all, there have been no injuries or safety incidents on any City of Fargo projects since I last presented to you. A lot of information. We're trying to drive the public to this website as much as possible, provide as much up-to-date information about current projects and also future projects at this location of fargostreets.com. I'd encourage the public to view this and find more information about what's going on around town. Brief update on one of our fiber build outs. We're working in or the company is working in year two of their full fiber build out in the city of Fargo. You can see there are a number of locations that have been already installed. Number of locations that are proposed with routes planned and they continue to build out through this area. If the public does have any concerns about anything going on in these this project, we have contact information here that we then have staff that can follow up on those concerns. Talk about some of our ongoing rehab and reconstruction projects. First of all, 45th Street South. We're doing a concrete pavement repair on 45th Street. Currently, northbound traffic is reduced to one lane between 15th Avenue South and 9th Avenue. Eastbound traffic at 13th Avenue is currently detoured. That should be clearing up soon. And then later this week, work is going to switch to Phase 2, which is southbound. And southbound will be reduced to one lane. Northbound will increase to two lanes of traffic. 32nd Avenue South all underground utilities have been completed on the project the roadway east of University Drive is complete The contractors currently working on the roadway between 15th Street and University Drive University and 32nd Avenue intersection is currently open on a temporary asphalt surface And that will close again in mid-august for the reconstruction of that intersection NP Avenue, just south of us a couple blocks here, the roadway is closed between 2nd Street and 4th Street. The underground utilities are complete. The contractor is starting to work on earthwork roadway surface for that portion of the project. And then the intersection of 3rd Street and NP Avenue is open on a temporary gravel surface. They'll keep working on this, get the work done west of 2nd Street, and then they'll ultimately go into the 2nd Street intersection and close that. We have a number of core neighborhood reconstruction projects. The first I'll highlight is in Longfellow neighborhood. All work has been, so I'll maybe just give a little bit of background on this too. We offer a lot of, we require a lot of phasing on these projects to ensure that properties have adjacent locations where they can be parking. And so some of these kind of get segmented up as I talk through what's complete and what's not yet. But all work has been completed on Longfellow Road. Underground utilities are complete on 29th Avenue North, and they're starting to work on the roadway paving on 29th Avenue. And then they're also working on underground utilities on Evergreen Road. Another core neighborhood, again, in Longfellow neighborhood, Maple Street, so the one block kind of on the north side of this picture, and then what's east of that on Willow Road, those are complete and open to the traffic. West, kind of going to the half cul-de-sac that turns south, underground utilities are complete there, and they continue to work on the phasing, or on that project through the phasing. Next core neighborhood project Hawthorne neighborhood the north two blocks that you see in this image the one on 10th Avenue the northernmost on 7th Street Those are complete and open to traffic The next two blocks the one on 11th Avenue and the next kind of mid block on 7th Street Roadway paving is done. They're installing sidewalks and driveways and hopefully be opening that up to traffic here soon And then they'll continue to work on those south two blocks. I Another core neighborhood, this one in Roosevelt neighborhood, they are complete, more or less complete, on 8th Avenue and then 3rd Street south of 8th Avenue. We're expecting that to open to the traffic this week, and then they'll finish off on that final block on the north side. A lot of other rehab and reconstruction projects happening around town that I won't go into detail, but know that, you know, Work continues on these and continues to progress along the project timelines. Highlight just a couple new development projects first Selkirk fourth Selkirk place fourth edition. Sorry phase one there I believe they installed the top lift of asphalt on that roadway today in that phase In phase two they're working on underground utilities Lomer has been completed and as part of this project. We also extended the levee along drain 53 and the levee portion is complete and they're just placing topsoil along that levee and Again, a couple other new development projects I won't go into depth on, but a couple of these are up north, industrial-type new developments. And then we do an annual asphalt wear course in our somewhat older new developments that haven't had that final lift. That's also going on. Highlight the southwest metro pond. I think the last time I showed this, it wasn't looking quite as green. But on the southern portion of the pond, you can see it's been seeded and is being established quite well there. And then on the northern part, they're still excavating clay there. About 90% of the overall excavation is complete. And again, they remain on track to complete this in time. Highlight a shared use path. This is the VA trail shared use path. They continue to work along this. You know, a lot of the work on the call it north half has been completed. Just a couple of images showing the forming that was done and recently in a portion and then a large amount of the shared use path that's adjacent to the VA property on the north side. Belmont flood wall and flood risk management project, the north flood wall adjacent to the water treatment plant, that is complete and they're working on backfilling that soon. And then they have started on excavation for the southern flood wall to protect the Stern property. Few projects have been completed. The First Avenue North Utility Location Verification Project is complete, Crackville Project and Asphalt Seal Code. They still do have some pavement markings to complete, but otherwise that project is complete. We have a couple of projects that have been recently awarded that will be starting up soon. J&O 45th Street Apartments and then also 8th Avenue South. And with that, happy to take any questions if there are any.

Thank you, Mr. Nachmus. It's clearly it's summer. Lots going on. Any questions or comments, commissioners? All right. Appreciate the update. Thank you. Commissioners, we'll move from my left to right in terms of any liaison reports. So, Commissioner Peterson.

for george mister mayor thank you yes i think we've all been busy at least two of us have been extremely busy probably a third because it's your full-time job now uh... regarding meetings and things like that so you have to have budget hearings all uh... or two more days anyway i am meeting with their water reclamation people in terms of the state to work getting out into the field and meet them at tomorrow on tuesday uh... diversion authority starting up so those of us that are on various committees and subcommittees get to get into gear uh we have a da operate a couple of da up a brief tomorrow afternoon and then a finance committee start or not tomorrow but on wednesday and then finance committees on wednesday i have my first da board meeting in two years on thursday so i'll see a couple of you there at that that's going to be fun uh friday saturday sunday you have some of the best swimmers in the state of north dakota and in the upper Midwest swimming at Hulbert. So if you're bored and want to see some of the best athletes, and I'm not exaggerating, we have some of the best swimmers in North America swimming in this area. It's crazy. I don't know what's in the Red River water, but apparently it's pretty good for some of us. So if you're bored and want to see some skilled kiddos swimming about at Hulbert, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. Next week, busy off and on with other meetings and subcommittee meetings. I don't think Any of those will conflict. I'll give you reports on what I find. We have incentive brown bag next week. I'll give you reports on what I find after I start meeting with all my committee members. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Commissioner Turnberg.

Now that our portfolios have somewhat changed, I still have the library, so I will post updates with what is going on there. We're in the middle of budget discussions, so we're getting to know the ins and outs of the budget. It was an early day this morning. It'll be an early day tomorrow. So just getting the hang of all the new departments and new people, new faces, and we'll keep you updated as changes come.

Thank you. Commissioner Strand?

Thank you, Mayor Beauches. A few updates on various fronts. The Cass Clay Community Land Trust is, I'm going to guess, seven or eight years old now. And we're at 32 homes now that are owned by people in our broader community. And I think their first resale is happening shortly. So that's just been a hugely successful effort. And the best thing to happen out of it is it's It's not entrenched in City Hall. It's in our broader community and it's a real valuable approach to providing dual ownership where people can buy a house but not have to buy the land and it's more affordable. That's a real success story in our community. And just so you know, they're operating out of the Beebe House. So if you're out and about and want to go look at that historic property that's now the home of the land trust, that's a really, really another successful part of that process. Another of my portfolios is transit. And initially, I'd like to acknowledge Julie Baumelman's retirement is right around the corner, I think the 24th of July. She's been there for, I don't know, 17 or I'm not sure how many years, but for a long, long time as a director and has been through a lot with the city and with our communities with transit. So I'd like to thank Julie and also acknowledge we have 20 some applicants. at this point for her position replacement. So that process is unfolding right now, starting today, as far as the process of receiving and vetting the applicants. My airport authority duty ended last meeting with the passing of the baton to Commissioner Turnburg. It's been really a process and an experience to be there through all these years, watching the airport go through the iterations of taking us into the new future with the parking ramp, with the expansion. It's just really a success story and a legacy one in our community. And I wish you the very best, Commissioner Turnberg, with that group. They're quite the team of leaders. Commissioner Berg, Rick Berg is chair right now. On a public health front, it's Dr. Lindenman. We need to thank her. She's stepping down as the public health officer, and applicants are being received now for vetting and interviewing and finding a new public health officer. I believe there's four or five or six applicants already, and some really good applicants, so that's... an important step that's going on with public health and a good one. One topic that's going on in the background but not back burner necessarily is public health has been leading the discussion locally and they're not the first in the country to do this but looking at the discussion of tobaccos and flavors and how it affects youth and minors in schools and that's a teeter-totter to balance the business community and the public health community But that's unfolding right now on a daily basis. And your input will be really welcomed in that as we represent all people in that. And that's my report, Mayor.

Thank you. Commissioner Gullickson.

Thank you. Last Thursday, I had the privilege of spending the day with our fire department at Station 4. They were very kind, very welcoming. We went around to several different stations. I got several grand tours. and got to see several of the differences in the way that they function and the space availability in those various stations. A point of pride here I wanted to share with everybody is that our fire department is the only accredited fire department in North Dakota. And out of over 27,000, depending on where you reference, over 27 to 29,000 fire departments in the United States, there are only about 300, just over 300 that are accredited. So hats off to them. That was hard earned and they're working hard to keep that designation. Also, I've been to a handful of planning meetings, as I had alluded to earlier. Also, MATBUS and MetroCOG meetings and Renaissance Board will meet in the morning. And just as a point, I don't know if I need to request personal privilege or not, but I would like to say that being a new commissioner, thank you to our staff. I have had a warm welcome People have been encouraging. They've been helpful. They said if you need to know anything, need to talk to anybody, reach out to us. And I'm just really proud of the team that we have. And I just wanted to say thank you.

Thank you. I'll give my updates. So as it's been alluded to, and many of you know, we started our budget workshops today. So thank you, thank you, thank you to our teams who have been working on that. And it's been a long day for many of you as well. We did four hours this morning. We'll do four hours starting at nine o'clock tomorrow morning and then Wednesday starting at eight. And the public can certainly watch that live or recorded later on any of our city Fargo social media channels. July 27th will be our finance meeting, which is next Monday, which is our intention is to take the information we learned, dig a little deeper, try to set some variables and agree upon so that we can set the preliminary budget for our August 3rd commission meeting. And then we'll continue the process with more conversations through September 28th, which is our goal for the commission to act on our final 2027 budget in order to meet the statutory requirement within the state of North Dakota. So again, thank you to the finance team and everyone that's been working on that. Public Works, I had my first meeting with Director Bendow on Thursday. I get to tour the facility, meet the team, and looking forward to that and learn more about how they serve our Fargo neighbors. The human resources team is continuing to dive into market rate data to best evaluate where the city stands compared to our peer cities and employers. I think a lot of what we talked about and learned today we talk about employee compensation is it's not just you know local political subdivisions that end up hiring people away or attractive but it's also regionally both large and big cities but even private sector so what can we do to continue to be an employer of choice throughout city and then finally with the police department a week ago july 14th was the three-year mark of officer jake walling's end of watch fargo pd held a moving remembrance ceremony on that morning to remember officer walden's sacrifice and courage to our community and and i'll take the liberty of quoting uh chief stefanowitz who shared that day that jake's story reminds us that courage is not measured by years of service it's measured by the choices we make when everything is on the line may we remember not only how he died but how he lived with kindness humility optimism in a servant's heart and may we always remember how he answered his final call with courage honor and a selflessness that will forever define his legacy. So again, we thank you, Officer Wallin and his family for the final sacrifice he made for our community. And my final piece as it relates to liaison reports is to mark your calendars for Wednesday, October 12th from 5 to 8 p.m. in Broadway Square is the annual police community picnic. This is free event to the public and the community is encouraged to attend. And it's always kind of a fun event Talking about community events, many of you participated in the street fair this last week. Continue to hear great reports from both our downtown businesses as well as people who participated, even though with the heat and the smoke, they were pleased with the attendance. And it sounds like more vendors than they've had in the past, so celebratory there. And then finally, I want to cheerlead, I was able to attend a ribbon cutting this afternoon for Good Bulb. And that's over on 12th Avenue North, the 4200 block. And it's just remarkable to hear that there is not, this is going to be the first light bulb manufacturer in the United States since most of them have off-boarded overseas and other places. So right here in Fargo, North Dakota, we're back to manufacturing American-made light bulbs, LEDs, and congrats to Tom Enright and his team on that work and we'll hopefully see them continue to grow here in Fargo. So with that, we'll go to public comment. We have one person who signed up, Mr. Foster. And I see that he's here. So we'll let you have the microphone. And as a reminder, there's a two and a half minute limit. And I know you're no stranger to this process. So thank you for being here tonight.

Thank you for having me. You know, it's a very divisive world out there. I interact with the public a lot. And there's one subject that Everyone's in agreement on, except the company present in this room. Fargoans do not want or need flock cameras, and we should be getting rid of them. And first off, the fact that we even have this type of AI technology in Fargo, after that, we're still dealing with the fallout of the Lips case. We don't know how much that's going to cost us. And then the city of Fargo has the audacity, not only to keep using these flock cameras, but to put out a little... like a half-ass. We have a portal. We have rail guards. Where are the protections for Angela Lipps? And the people of Fargo are just supposed to accept it? It's absolutely ridiculous. If there's one police department in the country that should be limited in using AI, it's the Fargo Police Department. The answer is given so far been a slap in the face, and much like the Angela Lipps case, will be a slap in the wallet too. And it's not just a Fargo thing. In one Texas case, they used over 83,000 images taken from flock cameras to bust a woman for getting an abortion out of state. My God, I'm so glad that we're using these to protect and serve us. Furthermore, the Institute for Justice found that 21 times they've had evidence of officers using these cameras to stalk and harass people in their private lives. And by the way, Los Angeles just voted to cancel their contract. These are serious national implications with no actual rail guards. And listen, I get safety. I have a two-year-old daughter. Of course I want my community to be safe. Of course I want it to be someplace I can walk with her. I never thought that a privately owned corporation with doing God knows what with the images is the way to get there, though. And furthermore, I doubt that there's many parents in Fargo that would feel safer under those conditions. And you know what? Let's get to the most outrageous part. By the very fact of how the Fargo Police Department has responded and enacted not only the Angela Lipps case, but by continuing to double down on these flock cameras, is making our city less safe. The trust that was built up over decades by the Fargo Police Department has been burned by this city commission and this police in six months. So many people have actively told me they don't call the police anymore because they don't trust them. In short, the message that you're sending is loud and clear. The city and this police department are putting pride and profit over people. I would like to end by reminding you that you're supposed to represent Fargo, North Dakota, not Fargo, North Korea. Thank you.

Commissioners, is there a motion to adjourn? There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Motion to second. Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll move to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Opposed, nay. Thank you.