City Commission - Regular Meeting

me

I will call our meeting back to order as we recess from executive session, and we'll begin our meeting with a Pledge of Allegiance. We invite you to stand and join us. Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you, and we'll start with our roll call.

Gullickson? Here. Peterson?

Here.

Strand?

Here.

Turnburg? Here. Boucher?

Here. We have in front of us the agenda for our September 14th meeting. Is there a motion to approve or edit the agenda? I so move. Second. All right, there's a motion to approve and a second. Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Thank you. Motion carried. We have our minutes that were sent out to us regarding the August 31st regular meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes or to edit the minutes?

I so move.

Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioners. Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. Thank you. The motion carries. Just for everyone's knowledge, we know we have a full agenda with a lot of conversation this evening. So we will plan. We'll check in about 6.30, see how everyone's doing, but plan for probably a break, approximately 6.30, just to allow everyone a few minutes at that time. But we'll see how everything moves forward tonight. So with that, commissioners, we have the consent agenda in front of us. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda items 1 through 34? I so move. Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Any discussion? Commissioner Peterson.

Mr. Mayor, thank you. Once again, I want to thank Mr. Redlinger and the team to their response in a timely fashion to my late questions. So gratitude to you. Apologize to the sometimes silliness of it all, but I got to learn. So this is how I learn. Asking questions. Grateful. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

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

Turnberg? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Strand?

Yes.

Boucher?

Aye. All right. Commissioners, we are moving on to item number 35, which is the beginning of our many public hearings for the evening. So our first is a public hearing related to the annexation of 122.95 acres, more or less, located in a portion of the north half of Section 10, Township 138 North.

range forty nine west of the fifth principal meridian in cass county north dakota this is the first reading of annexation ordinance we have mister crest from the planning department thank you mister mayor good evening commissioners donald crest of the department of planning and development i'll be presenting the next two items and assistant planning director mark williams and assistant city engineer nathan bourbon will join me uh... for part of the presentation for item thirty six item thirty five is the mayor stated here is annexation of part of the north half of Section 10, Township 138 North, Range 49 West. This is 64th Avenue South here. This is North Dakota State College of Science and Capstone Academy. The black outlined area depicts the area to be annexed. This is one shot of it here. The There are no structures in the annexation area. Again, here's the State College of Science and Capstone Academy. In the annexation area, there are no structures. The area has recently been under cultivation. This is an excerpt from the Fargo Growth Plan 2024. The subject property is shown here in Section 3 of Super Grid A. At the December 2, 2025 Planning Commission, that commission found the annexation is consistent with the Fargo Growth Plan. This is the annexation plat. Again, it's a required part of the annexation. It depicts the annexation area. The entire annexation area will be included in the Covey Ranch third edition subdivision, which will be our next agenda item. The annexation has been noticed as required by North Dakota Century Code. The applicant's representatives, Jace Hellman and Don Dabbert of Dabbert Custom Homes, are with us this evening and they wish to address the commission. The recommended motion is stated in your staff report and shown on the screen. That concludes staff's presentation. Thank you, commissioners.

Any questions for Mr. Kress? All right. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak to the commission regarding this annexation? I'll have you join right over here. Please state your name.

Good evening, commissioners. Jay Selman on behalf of the developer for this project. I don't have anything additional to add to that. I appreciate Donald for the presentation for that. I'm just here to ask if there are any questions you guys may have.

Thank you. Any questions for the developer? Questions?

All right.

Is there anyone else here to speak to the City Commission regarding the annexation? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Is there a motion, Commissioners?

So moved.

Thank you, Commissioner. Second. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion related to the annexation presented in front of us? Discussion? All right, hearing none, we'll do a roll call vote.

Strand?

Yes.

Turnberg? Yes. Gullickson? Yes. Peterson?

Yes.

Boucher?

Aye. Thank you, Commissioners. Item number 36 is another public hearing. I'm not going to read everything here, but there's several subparts of that which multiple staff members from multiple departments will walk us through. So as I will move on with public hearing, item number 36 is presented in the printed agenda that was made available to the public. Mr. Kress.

Thank you, sir. Commissioners, continue on here. This is the Covey Ranch Third Edition, a major subdivision and zone change, located here, again, south of 64th Avenue. Again, our landmarks here of North Dakota State College of Science and Capstone Academy. You will see, as you follow my cursor, the outline of the recently annexed area, plus this other portion, which was already in the city of Fargo. That's part of this plat. We'll get to the zone change in a minute here. There are multiple property owners as applicants, including the city of Fargo, because we own the drainage channel on the south side of this plat. Here are some views. This is the same one you saw a couple of minutes ago. Looking south, again, just a recently cultivated field. They're looking toward, that's the overpass over 64th Avenue over I-29. And then looking northeast from 45th Street, you're on the west side of this looking northeast. And then if you were to go straight across here, that's where the drainage channel would be. And then this is actually on the other side. Now you're facing west. That's the existing drainage channel that the drainage channel in the south part of this property will be part of. The plat depicts the subdivision. There are 158 lots of various zonings here. And as you see, here's the drainage channel. The plat also dedicates right of way for several public streets, as you see here. And there is a chart in your map. packet that enumerates these streets that are being dedicated and their widths. The current zoning is agricultural. These two green areas are the two existing schools. The proposed zoning is depicted on this exhibit here. So limited commercial up here. MR3 multi-dwelling residential here. SR4 single dwelling residential here. And these two different greens will be PI, public and institutional. This will be a park. And again, here's our drainage way. And then some of the lots here will remain agriculturally zoned until the time they are ready to develop. The MR3 and LC zone properties each have conditional overlays and the conditional overlay is included in the zoning ordinance that was prepared by the city attorney's office that is also part of your packet. And this chart of the zoning which enumerates all the zoning of the individual lots is included in your packet. Commissioners, that is items A, B, and C. So do you commissioners have any questions for staff at this point on these items before we continue the other items?

Commissioners, any questions? Seeing none, we'll move on to Mr. Vorbrum and Mr. Williams.

Yes, sir. Mark Williams and Nathan Vorbrum will now discuss items 36D and E.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Commissioners. As Donald mentioned, I'll cover the next couple items associated with this agenda topic. First is the developer agreement. Donald alluded to that there's multiple property owners associated with this subdivision. We have created a draft developer agreement with Each of these property owners, the developer agreement itself, there's nothing too out of the ordinary with it for a plat or subdivision similar to this type of plat. There's a couple key items, though, I thought I would highlight that's within that developer agreement. First one is intersection control. Subdivision borders 64th Avenue and 45th Street, so two major arterials for the city. So we want to make sure that we have the future intersections well designated and known for any future property owners or businesses out here. So on your right hand side, the blue circles there, those are the three locations that allow full accesses. So all turning movements will be supported long term in those three locations. And then there'll be three additional accesses allowed to those two roadways in the future, but those will become limited at some point. So they'll either be right in or right out only into the subdivision or possibly allow left-hand turn into, but there'll be no left-hand turning movements allowed out of the subdivision at those orange circles. Like I said, that's very important to have within this developer agreement so as future business owners come and look at properties in here, they understand what accesses will be allowed for their future business site within this area and understand those limitations that may exist. The last item I thought briefly touched base on is 65th Avenue South. So there's a green box I added on the right-hand side of that map. Right now, Sports Drive is half dedicated, the right-of-way, I should say, half dedicated with this plat. There is a pending plat that's going through the process on the east side of this subdivision. So that will dedicate the remainder of Sports Drive. But for some reason, that plat does not move forward. We want to make sure that we are able to construct a proper temporary turnaround or cul-de-sac on the far east end of 65th Avenue. So that's necessary. So if Sports Drive did not connect the... 64th Avenue South want to make sure that fire trucks or snow plows or any other larger vehicles are able to turn around to make proper movements in that so within the developer agreement There's provisions that if sports drive the remainder of that right away Was not dedicated in the timely manner that the developer agrees to grant to the city at no cost and easement for us to be able to construct that temporary turnaround Next topic is the infrastructure request we received from the developer. So we have received a request for improvements to the roadways and all the underground infrastructure associated with that, shown in green on the right-hand side, as well as the stormwater channel in the bottom left of it. The design is requests or the request excuse me is to have the city design bid and administer the construction of these improvements The request also is asking the city to special assess the cost of these improvements to the benefiting properties This follows past practice with all developments similar to this and is an allowable Is allowable within our infrastructure funding policy today? This request has been brought to our public works project evaluation committee for consideration and they are recommending approval of it With that that's all I have with these items and front of you is the recommended motions for All the items that were presented to you and we can stand for any questions

Any questions, commissioners?

Commissioner Turnberg. Have we had discussions with the schools? Is this all good with them? Did they have any future plans for expansion, or was there anything that was discussed with either Capstone or North Dakota State School of Science?

Yeah, quite frequently we're interacting with the school district as far as where we're expanding. They're aware of this, and in addition to the north of here, they have acquired property for future expansions.

But neither one would be part of the school district, the private school and state school.

We haven't heard any feedback from NDSCS or Capstone.

And then what are these specials going to look like? Because it looks like a lot of infrastructure. Will we be competitive here? with Horace and West Fargo with these? Will they be similar to what other new construction specials are?

Yeah, we haven't designed this project or developed any sort of preliminary cost estimate for this project yet, but we will definitely try to make this project as attractive as possible for receiving as many bidders as possible for the construction, which helps keep the costs down. But that's one thing that we, as we design, we try to design very appropriately to minimize the costs. for those future property owners in this area, but also make sure that it is meeting our minimum specifications for the city.

As long as we're keeping that in mind and staying competitive so people want to move there rather than going to a neighboring city because we don't want our specials. I mean, people already don't want them, but let's keep it as low as possible.

Correct, yeah. So we make sure that the project is appropriately sized, but also that we bid it in an appropriate time frame too that we create... When we're bidding, hopefully we have the largest bidding pool possible and it gives me bids received for the project.

Thank you. Commissioners, any other questions for the team? Commissioner Strand?

Thank you. I'm curious with this discussion point of special assessments for improvements and it being consistent with past practices, Going forward, which elements of this project and development are in the discussion phase for future special policies? And what would change conceivably, if anything?

I guess I'm not aware of any discussions on any changes. I think that was discussed part of land development code that maybe once that's completed, there will be some conversations on future greenfield special assessments like this. But as of date, to date, I'm not aware of any conversations.

And if I might, with regard to those greenfield discussions about specials for development out to the edge, What's up in the air that could be discussed and changed in the future? So I'm just, you know, we're here right now, but then there's this discussion about what we're doing down the road, especially with regards to specials. What topics will be in the scales and measured that will be up in the air for future policy decisions for EDGE development specials?

Commissioner, if I may, if you're okay with that, to take the response for you guys, that really comes down to us as the commission. So what we would be approving this evening is to follow our current policy, which has been done the last decade or so, in terms of how specials are split out in the green fields. But I think there is an interest, especially based on your question, I know conversations we've had in the Economic Development Incentive Committee is, You know, we see assessments as an incentive, but until we as a commission have decided what that looks like, if it changes or not, if there's any proposed changes, that really is gonna be at the direction of us. And so I'm hopeful that once we get through the budget process, that can be one of the first conversations we start looking at so that we can give certainty to development and growth and what that looks like. So as far, you know, and that goes down to the split and the percentages and all that and where we might prioritize or not prioritize. I mean, I think there's a lot of different ideas out there. But part of that is also then visiting with the development community to see what's manageable as well.

And might I continue? Yes. You know, this is 140-some lots. We know we need lots, but we also know that we need to address these policies. At least that's my sense that they're front burner to be. And I'm not in favor of... of changing what we offer to the public now, but it's not a secret that these topics are forthcoming and may change policies and protections for the developers in the city in the future and the way we assess. So the sooner we can get to that conversation, the better. As soon as we have exact agreement on where we're at going into future EDGE development, the better. Because we need to get there. And I'm not sure we're all on the same page or know the options or not right now. And right now we have this before us, and it complies. I'm not sure it will tomorrow.

Thank you, Commissioner. Any other questions for the staff? Is there anyone from the public who would like to present to the City Commission regarding this project or this specific agenda item?

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the commission. Again, Jace Hellman on behalf of the developing group for this development. Again, I appreciate staff's presentation for this. This has been a project that's been in discussion with Mr. Dabbart and the city for years now, and we are now finally to the point of getting in front of you, so I'm happy to be in front of you guys. But if you have any questions, happy to answer them. I have no additional information to provide for this one.

Commissioner, is there any questions for the developer? Hearing none, thank you. Anyone else wish to present to the committee, to the commission regarding this agenda item? Hearing none, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioners, do we have a motion? You have before us, you know, this is kind of unique in the fact that it's kind of five subsections. Three of them are lumped into items 36A through C, and then 36D, 36E. In the past, some of these would have been split out over multiple meetings, but... based on, again, as it was related to, there's been conversations for many years to get to where we are today, and we're finally here. So if you're comfortable, we could do it all in one full motion, or if you want to split them off, I'll take whatever you want to present.

Mr. Mayor, I recommend approving the recommended motions, and so move.

Thank you. So 36A through E? Second. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion? Discussion? Discussion? I'll just add again, based on the question from Commissioner Strand and others, that I know there's a lot of interest in the community and obviously amongst us in terms of what special assessment policy looks like going forward. But as we continue to address the development opportunities that are in the pipeline currently, I think making sure we're adhering at least Current policy to make sure that that certainty is there for those developers But as we move forward there'll be plenty of opportunity for discussion and community feedback as we have as we move forward So any other discussion? Hearing none. We'll go to a roll call vote Turnburg.

Yes, Gullickson. Yes, Peterson. Yes strand.

Yes, okay. All right Thank you commissioners All right. With that, we have item number 37, our public comment period on our 2027 preliminary budget. I know that we may have interested parties to visit with us here. So I will do as a reminder to folks that while there is not a time limit to speak, we ask if you can keep your comments brief to approximately three minutes. And if someone's already said what you've wanted to say, even just standing up and say ditto to what someone else said, just in the interest of time but we of course want to hear from folks so that's the whole point of this so with that I'll open the public hearing and is there anyone wishing to present thank you sir and make sure please share your name and if there's an organization you're representing if that's pertinent

Mayor and commissioners, I'm Brad Bachmeier, former Fargo planning commissioner, professor, and former board president of the Arts Partnership. For several years, Fargo's investment in the Arts Partnership has come under scrutiny, yet its impact is clear, measurable, and easily demonstrated. We see it in the opportunities for our children and families, in our cultural institutions, and millions in economic activity. TAP supports an entire network of arts and cultural organizations, from the Fargo Theater, Plains Art Museum, and FM Symphony, to Trollwood, Theater B, youth, and music programs. 21 organizations received grants this year, and more than 62% of those provide substantial youth arts education. Fargo-based grantee organizations account for more than 510,000 annual audience visits and an estimated 14.7 million in audience spending. These organizations are part of how people experience community, identity, and pride in Fargo. It's also important to understand what this $90,000 represents. In 2001, the city of Fargo asked the Arts Partnership to administer arts funding on the city's behalf. TAP continues to do that work competitively, transparently, and efficiently while leveraging substantial outside support. This is not charity. It's a public investment delivering a public purpose. And put its size in perspective, in a general fund budget around $147 million, TAP represents about six cents of every $100 that Fargo spends, six pennies. In 2012, Fargo adopted Go2030, its comprehensive plan through extensive citizen input. Its vision calls for a vibrant city with a robust economy, high quality of life, and a welcoming community. Arts and culture is one of its main guiding principles. I challenge you to find any investments in your budget that leverage more, generate greater economic activity, reach more people, or contribute more directly to the Fargo our citizens have said they want. This is what sound fiscally conservative public investment looks like. The Arts Partnership has demonstrated its extraordinary value and earned Fargo's continued investment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bachmeier. Anyone else to speak to item number 37? Anyone else from public wish to speak to the preliminary 2027 budget? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. And for everyone's benefit, just point out that on September 23rd will be our next finance committee meeting. You wanted to speak to... This is just related to the preliminary budget. Yep. Nope, that's right, thank you. So yeah, September 23rd will be our next finance committee meeting in this room from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m. And then our final discussion as a commission will be at the September 28th commission meeting, which we will hopefully pass a budget for 2027 in order to comply with our statutory deadline that all local political subdivisions have to meet. So if you're tracking this, know that those are the things that'll be happening next. Those are, of course, all open to the public. um to observe either online or in person so with that we'll move on to item number 38 which is an agreement for the property demolition with master well let me back up sorry commissioners any questions or comments on that budget item on item number 37 commissioner strand

It's really important to note that a few years ago when this topic surfaced and the conversation came about do we look at social services funds and the arts partnership and the downtown community partnership and Native American Commission, we had a full house. we had a sign-up of people speaking to us, telling us very, very, very, very clearly, do not mess with our arts funding. I was the one who advanced that to get the conversation going. And it was pretty palpably loud and clear what the public asked us to do and told us they wanted. So this is really something tonight to see only one person speaking about that funding topic right now when we all know there are conversations about whether we, for example, continue arts funding. So I just want to note that the public has spoken very loudly and clearly, and it certainly got my attention a few years ago.

Commissioner Peterson?

Mr. Mayor, thank you. Commissioner Strand, you're right. I've received copious amounts of emails, which is great. Know that what the mayor said is spot-on accurate to those of you that are here or those of you playing the home game. Contact us. Talk to us. We are available. All of us want to engage. We want to listen. People like me, and I think the other remaining four of us, want to learn as well. You have three new faces here. Some of us have governed. Some of us haven't. It's important for you to share your thoughts with us so we know what's important to you. We don't know everything. I don't know everything. Some of my predecessors may or my peers may. I do not know everything. So the more you engage with us, the better it is for us, not just you. So I would encourage you to pay attention to the local budget, whether it's this school, county, parks. Get engaged. Start listening. Start paying attention and contact us. I am wanting to learn. I am wanting to listen. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you. all right with that we'll go on to item number 38 agreement for pro we've already closed the public hearing i'm sorry but please reach out uh through email yep Nope, appreciate that. So item number 38, agreement for property demolition with Master Construction Company Incorporated for 1544 3rd Avenue South. We have Mr. Radnick from the Inspections Department.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners. Tonight we're here just about the demo agreement for 1544 3rd Avenue South from RFP 26170. Just for a little bit of history on this property, on November 24th, 2025, the Board of City Commissioners deemed this property a dangerous building and to be removed or repaired by January 23rd. After that, the property owners did come in and receive an extension for that to March 27th, 2026. After that, they did ask for a subsequent extension and were denied at the city commission. After that, the property owner did file litigation against the city and receive an agreement from the city to extend it out for another 90 days for it to be weathered in and 120 days for it to be cited. After the initial deadline of March 27th was reached and exceeded, we did put out an RFP for the demolition of the structure. That RFP did close, and we did have two bidders on that RFP. We did convene our review committee, and right there in the memo, there is a typo. It is not Jeff Hett. It was Dylan Riemann, who's a member of that committee, along with myself and one of the other inspectors. At that time, we based our... decision on the two proposals that were in front of us and at that time we were looking to award it to pioneer LLC But because of the agreement that we entered into with property owner we had to put that on hold I did contact both of the the bidders on July 2nd of 2026 just to see if they would hold on to those bids and if they would still honor them after the 90-day period. And they both confirmed that they would at that point. Later on, around September 8th, I did contact them both again because the 90-day period had come to an end, asked them if they would honor the bids, and only Master Construction was willing to honor their bid. Pioneer did want to amend their bid, but we weren't going to open up the RFP again, so we didn't allow them to amend it. So we only received one valid bid for this, or one valid proposal from Master Construction. and we just want to make the recommendation that they receive the contract, and then we move forward with the demolition of this structure.

Thank you, Mr. Radnick. Any questions? Any questions? Okay, with that, we've had six speakers request to speak to the subject, five of whom I believe are in person with one online. So our online person will be our final speaker. So with that, the order I have on the sheet in front of me is Dan Wall, then Brandon Wall, Nate Wall, Danny Wall, Haley Gust, and Jay Betasol. So with that, Mr. Wall. You're available. I want to invite you to speak over here. Thank you.

Hello, and thanks for having me. Well, it always sounds like a different story when someone else tells it against you. The deal is, is I've entered into an agreement with the city for 90 days. I was supposed to turn my story and a half house into a two-story house. And it's kind of a setup because they don't give out 90-day permits if you study it at all. Even if you're a contractor, you get 180 days to commence. That's begin building or else you get it renewed. Not knowing at the time, I had all these lawsuits filed because they were going to tear my house down like 100 days ago. And So I ran to my lawyer, and he said, City of Fargo, people in Fargo only save about 2% or 3% of these homes because they tear them down before they get a chance to get it in front of a judge. Well, my lawyer was slickety split. I owe him $6,000 for putting all these judgments against the City of Fargo. Well, when they seen that they have to come up with all this information about how I've been hassled for years now, they folded and gave me 90 days to finish my house. Well, I thought, well, 90 days, phew, I can do that, you know. Well, I'm 67 years old. I'm a disabled senior citizen. I didn't get a chance to retire. I've had nerves burnt off in my spine in eight places. So I qualify for American disabilities if you look up those rules. I've been saying all along I'm disabled and I, you know. But anyways, I was set up for this 90 day agreement and that expired just a short time ago and I could have had it done another day. to their specs, they wanted it watertight. First of all, they wanted it shingled. Well, if it's already watertight, I've got friends that are professional roofers, once you get the tar paper or the ice and water on, it's considered watertight on the roof. But he's got me doing things, he wants me to finish things that don't even require a permit. So he wants to destroy my house. I'll show you pictures of what it looks like now. I turned it into a two-story. Thousands and thousands of dollars. Now, there's no insurance on this, so it's all out of pocket, and I'm on disability. So I've been asked to do the impossible. I turned it into a two-story instead of a story and a half, as you can see. I can pass them around if you can't. But that's what the house looks like now. It's even wrapped on that side. I'm in the middle of wrapping it, and it's almost half shingled. And he wants to tear it down. Now, the way I read the law is that if you're making advancements on it, which I have extreme advancements. I've got my kids and everybody else here to tell you how well I've worked.

Mr. Warren, if you'll pause for just a moment. Sure. If we could turn the – thank you, Brian. Commissioners, would you be open to an additional two and a half minutes for the property owner to speak to us? Commissioner Peterson?

Mr. Mayor, yes, I would. Those are the pictures I think we have in our packet.

I don't think we have these ones. They might have been sent to you? I think we do have those. Okay. Very similar.

Before we get there, is there any opposition to allowing the homeowner to speak for an additional two and a half minutes? He'll be the only one to get the extension, right? No opposition. You'll have two and a half more minutes.

Thank you. Anyways, they keep putting these danger signs on my home. Twice I've hired a structural engineer and I have a report and so do you guys I'm sure. that it's not dangerous. It never has been. Twice he shut me down because I've had a dangerous building and it's shut down again now because I didn't comply by a day or whatever and it's a dangerous building. Well, it's not. It never has been. I've hired a structural engineer twice now. I owe a lawyer $6,000 to get it to go another 90 days, which was a setup because there's really no hardly such thing as a 90-day permit unless you're building a shed or something. Permits are supposed to, from what I understand, they're supposed to be 180 days no matter if you're a contractor or a resident. And you're supposed to give sufficient time in the American Disabilities Act for a disabled person. But that all being said, we've had record temperatures this summer, third hottest summer on record in Fargo. And I'm asked to do the impossible, but I want you guys to reconsider and give me a little bit more time, and I'll have it wrapped. I mean, it's all, as you can see in the pictures, the outside's almost done. And that being said, this morning, last night I parked my pickup at dark, and I live a block away. I can see this house from my house. My son and his family of six were burned out of this house. So it's just been hell for me, okay?

This morning, last night I parked my pickup over there in the yard.

At dark, me and my son walked home. It was too dark to work. I was fixing the fence. This is what I woke up to this morning. City of Fargo's hassling me all the damn time, and that's my biggest problem here. I'm sick of it. Anybody that knows me, ask any one of these people here, I get harassed to no end from city inspections. I've told one city inspector, Laura, she goes, I go to her, I go, you know, if you don't quit harassing me, I'm going to file suit on you. Hardly see her. I don't even know where she's at anymore. And another inspector who'd come by, who's a really nice guy, he said, you know this isn't me doing this to you, right? I mean, I'm just not being treated fairly.

You give a 180-day permit and I get 90 days to finish?

I mean, come on. That was a setup from the get-go. But I'm almost finished, and I just beg you guys for a little more time. It's all out of pocket, man. I'm stealing from Peter to pay Paul and I'm on disability. This building, I've cleaned up the construction site since you've probably seen them pictures. I don't see any reason.

Thank you, Mr. Wall. Commissioner Peterson, do you have something?

Mr. Mayor, thank you. I know I've seen these pictures before. I think we must have got email correspondence. Did you send email correspondence to us?

One of my friends sent out some stuff, friends and family of Dan Walls. Thank you. I've also got a construction site that was going up north. I was just helping a friend. One of the inspectors was up there and says, who's building this? Anyway, Dan Wall, my sons were helping him too. He said, I wouldn't have Dan Wall do nothing. Well, he's on duty. He's running me down to friends and family because he didn't know who they were. I'm sick of being harassed.

Commissioners, any other questions? Mr. Wall, your request is to extend. Do you have a time?

They came in every two weeks and looked at my advancements. From what I understand in the rule, that every 180 days, if they come and inspect it, they give you another 180 every time they inspect it, or as long as you're advancing. Well, I'm doing everything I can, so I don't know where this, he keeps wanting to tear it down.

Do you have a specific day amount you would like us to consider if we were to consider that?

How much time?

Yes.

Well, just to finish the outside, give me a week. But that's not siding. I don't know where I'm going to pick the money up for the siding. But if I have it weathertight, I should be able to get a permit for the siding at any given time once it's weathertight, I would think.

Thank you. Commissioners, anything else? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Wall. Thank you. Next, we have Mr. Brandon Wall. Thank you.

thank you yep if you'll just say your name into the microphone please once you get there no rush and then as a reminder you'll have two and a half minutes hello and good evening my name is Nathan I'm the dance son I'm 40 years of age and proud to be an American I believe that I am blessed to live in the greatest country in the world everyone here could probably agree with me on that so what exactly does it mean to be part of the free world we could sometimes forget what it means and why we are the greatest country in the world and what our founding fathers died and fought for freedom and independence for the people by the people some may need to be reminded that guy right there who they work for and not let hate and discrimination to the highest degree dictate our constitutional liberties what i have been seen is no other than communism, and I think that we need to recognize it for what it is. There isn't a person in the world that I hate, and I know my dad feels the same. He's never wished bad upon anyone his entire life. The select few that work for the city, who work for the citizens of Fargo, which is all of us, for some reason hate my dad and can easily proven over and over again now for for whatever reason the guy that hates towards my someone he doesn't even know and my dad which has a heart of gold and fear of God should never be given power and authority over anything. I built structural buildings for 20 years, was a contractor for many of them. I've never seen anything like it. Unsafe building, which is definitely not. That was where it started. But then it's taken too much time and a ridiculous 90-day window allocated from a guy that's on disability. It's just one thing after another. I've been all over. I've been building thousands and thousands of square foot of commercial structures. There is not anything that is unsafe. So let's try timing. He should have got 180 days and not 90. And then we got the Disability Act. All right. Let me close. Sorry. It is literally hours away from getting roofed in Tyvek. Like, we're talking one day. I hope I am not the only one in this room that...

Thank you, Mr. Wall. Thank you. Do we have a Mr. Danny Wall? Are you present?

Hi, I'm Dan Wall, son of Dan Wall. I'd like to question when the time started on that 90 day window. And I think we might have been off one or two days and we got cut short and it should have been done on time if we were cut short. So from what I understand, I got an email from Moddinger or from Mr. Craig at Moddinger's office saying that they should get the stipulation filed soon. And that was at 3.42 p.m. on Thursday. So my question is when did this stipulation get filed?

And the question is for... Mr. Wall, it's not a cross-examination, so you're not able to... Oh, okay, I'm sorry. You're presenting to the commissioner.

I think we're cut short a day or two, because by law, let's say it goes through, and then we have to be informed... And then it's a day after that we get as a leeway. So I think we got cut a couple of days short and it should have been done or it would have been done. We are one day away from having it done. We are that close. I guess I'm just looking for you guys to reconsider in good faith for. The progress that we have done and. I think a good real number for when it could be completely finished and sided after it's enclosed after that day. Would even be 35 days or you know something like that. But. Yeah, I ain't asking for much. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Ms. Haley Gust? And as a reminder, you'll have two and a half minutes. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Haley Gus. I'm a friend of their of the wall family. I've just watched all of this come from when it started When I first met them a couple years ago to now I've seen the progress I've seen them put people volunteer put their time and effort into it from what I've looked up everybody it starts with it the permit goes for 180 days which we've all been talking about then you as long as there's been Progress on that and you can show it people get an extension. I'm not understanding why For this case they're not getting that he did Dan did call the day before and asked for more time And I understand that there was this 90-day agreement, but why didn't he not get the same? Consideration as everybody else it is like when they say that it's that close to being done It is that close to being done. Why would anybody? want to take this away from that family and I think that they've been through enough and it's just all the time and money. I mean, it's better for the neighborhood, you know, to get this house done. The roof is almost done. If you could, I mean, if they would have had that day, they would have done it for the people who showed up and volunteered, you know, friends, family, and everybody with them. They have all the materials, they have everything to finish it. The right thing to do is to give them more time. And by what everything says that I've looked up, you guys do grant extension. So I'm not understanding why they can't be granted the same thing as everybody else. And I just think that that should speak enough for the situation. They should be treated just as everybody else should. So that's all I have. I don't even need the two and a half minutes. Thank you.

Appreciate it. And then we have Mr. Betasol, I believe, still online. I'm getting an indication he might not be online. OK. So with that, commissioners, questions, comments? Mr. Strand?

Help me understand the state of the building right now.

The state of the building when we saw it on the 28th versus today is actually different. They were working without a permit and under a stop work order on Saturday. We have two citizens that did complain about this this weekend on Saturday to actually work on the roofing of the structure. Back when we told them to stop on the 28th, when we were out there to take a look at it and stuff, it was not substantially roofed. It was not ready to be Tyveked. They had not passed any inspections for any framing or anything like that. As a matter of fact, we had to initiate all the inspections. We had to let them know we were coming to the site to take a look, and they did not. Most of the time, they didn't meet us there. and they did not actually pass any framing inspections or call in any framing inspections. So as we saw it, they were putting things up and they were doing some things towards the tail end of the 90 days, possibly the last week or two. Throughout, there was a little bit of progress here and there, but not enough to be substantial. That is the story of the home from the time that we started it back in 2024 to the time that we are now in 2026. So this has been over two years that we've been working on this home.

Sorry, sir, no. Commissioner? Commissioner Strand.

Bear with me, but how much work would it take to get to the point where we look at it as stabilized and safe enough to not demolish immediately?

How much work in my estimation? Looking at what was there? On the 28th, if we base it off that, I would say there would at least be a couple of weeks, three to four maybe, of work that would need to be done to complete it properly. That's giving time for inspections as well as corrections and things like that.

A question in terms of the previous agreement. If I understand, because there's been a couple dates stated out, so there was a 90-day agreement, and if that was met, then that would trigger the second 120 for the siting. Is that correct?

Yeah, what it was, the agreement that we entered into was actually presented by Mr. Wall and his attorney as 90 days to get it weathered in, which means it would have to be roofed, Tyvek'd, all the windows and doors and stuff have to be in, and that is stated within the agreement. And then he would get an additional amount of time, up to 120 days, to get the siding on the structure. So he would get basically another 30 days after the 90 to get the siding completed.

So the 120 was inclusive of the first 90? Yes. Not in addition to?

Yes.

I appreciate that understanding. Commissioner Strand.

What would the assessed value of this house be in today's condition and in a repaired condition.

I'm not qualified to make that determination. If I was looking at it from my perspective, whoever would be taking on this house would be taking on a liability. They would either need to be torn down or completely remodeled by somebody who is willing to put the money and time and effort into it to get it done in a relatively quick amount of time.

I guess, Mayor, if there's a way forward, I'd rather have $46,000 plus put into the house than into demolishing it, but how could we ever assure that the owners would comply and get it up to safety standards versus demolition?

Mayor and Commissioners, Mr. Wall, I'm going to ask you, I will call you up shortly, but I'm just going to ask you to, I'll invite you up to speak. Please, no longer disrupting. Thank you. Commissioner Strand.

Mayor and Commissioner Strand, through this process, we have given them the opportunity to do whatever they need to do with the house for, like I said, the first time that a permit was taken out was on 7-29 of 2024. That permit was for an exploratory demo permit so that they could take a look at the house and evaluate what they needed to do. After that, they did receive a couple of subsequent remodel permits, one in 4-2 of 25, which was expired because they used over 180 days without showing progress. Again, they had another one that was opened in 1-2 of 26, so we did give them another opportunity. That one did expire, and that is why we brought the building forward, because they didn't have... enough going on or enough done to actually substantiate this not being a dangerous building. We did reopen that permit. We were not causing any more financial harm to Mr. Wall and his family so that they could continue to work on it through the 90-day stipulation and the 120-day stipulation that we had that was presented to us by them. They said that this is what they needed. Throughout that 90 days as we were going out there, There was no substantial work done. There was a little bit here, a little bit there. They would clean up a thing here. They would clean up a thing there. But they wouldn't work on the structure until I think it was the last maybe two weeks of the 90 days. And then they tried to rack it all out in one long sitting, I guess. And they couldn't make it. And that's the thing. That's the track record with this one from our standpoint is that they wait till the very end. And then they ask for something more, something more, something more just to prolong it. We have no doubt that we would be back in front of you again if you give them another extension for two weeks, 90 days, six years, we would be back in front of the commission again with the same information, the same building, sitting almost in the same condition.

Yes, sirs.

Mayor, I move we give them a two-week extension, and there's no yielding in any way, shape, or form on that approach. If in two weeks it isn't up to our abilities to say it's safe, we've all given them every chance we can, but I would say two more weeks won't break the bank.

Mr. Mayor, I'll second the motion for sake of discussion.

There's a motion and a second. Discussion? Commissioner Peterson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Radnick, have you or your team been inside this building enough times to figure out whether it's structurally sound or not? And where I'm going with that is, if we were to give them this two weeks, do you and your team, A, have a baseline of starting information to make sure it's structurally sound, and then B, do you have the time for you and your team to actually be present when they call in for various inspections. I don't want to set them up to fail, is my point.

Mayor and Commissioner Peterson, we have been trying to help them through the process through the whole time. They don't call in for inspections. We don't know where the structure really is. We would let them know, hey, we're coming out to take a look at things. But like I said, most of the time they weren't on site. And when they were on site, we didn't really get to conduct proper inspections. So we have not had one proper inspection on this property, so we don't know what the actual state of the things that they have done are in. If we give them a two-week extension, I feel like we're actually setting them up to fail even more than we are right now because the two-week extension is going to get them into a place where they may have corrections and things that they have to correct before it's weathered in, before everything is completed, and then we've just allowed them to put more money into the structure that should have been taken down three months ago, over 90 days ago.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Commissioners, we have a motion. Before I call for a roll call vote, I will just state for the purpose, and I've tried to convey this to some folks who have reached out about this, is I think it's important to recognize the difference between the role of our city staff and the decisions made by your elected leaders. The city inspections department has been acting on behalf of policies that have been put in place through city ordinance and then further agreements that have been put in place in this situation specifically. So while I understand that specifically the homeowner, and rightfully so, is frustrated in terms of this is their property, Any frustration should be directed at the decisions made by previous Commission's because all we made the decision on what can or can't move forward based on ordinance staff or simply Executing that agreement and while they certainly are the front line the face of Specifically some tensions situations like this one it is not them picking on anyone or picking and choosing winners and losers and In the end, the decision is made here in this commission. And of course, now we have a new commission. Many of these decisions were made with the previous commission, but we've inherited those agreements. So I just want to say that for the record. Again, understand how frustrating this process is for some folks. If I were in, I would be equally frustrated if it was my property, but also agreements were entered into with the previous commission. And so that's you know, where the processes lie. And now we have a decision in front of us. So Commissioner Peterson.

Mr. Mayor, thank you. To the family and the supporters, I am going to support you on this. I'm going to put my trust and faith in you that you will comply with what our inspectors have to say with the rules and ordinance we have in place in the next two weeks. Know that if it gets to two weeks and a day and this comes before us again, which it hopefully will not, but if it does, I will without a doubt, with no reluctance in my heart, vote to demolish your home. And that will be crushing to me because I realize it is your family home and realize the time and effort you put into it. But know that you've had a great deal of time to make things right. I'm going to support you on this. I don't know whether it's three or two or whoever it's going to be, but I'm going to support you. But know again. Two weeks, I will have no choice but to vote to demolish your home.

Thank you. Commissioners, any other discussion? Commissioner Gullixson.

I too will support this. However, I am with Commissioner Peterson. We need to see that progress and we need to get moving. I would recommend you gather everybody that you can to put your home together. I don't want us to be in a position where we're taking away homes. Please, please, please work with our staff and make sure that you are following these steps. I want to help you if at all possible, but I too will have to vote against it if it does come back to us the next round.

Mr. Turnburg. Sean, is there even time in two weeks to have an inspected and permitted and and okayed?

Well, what we can do is reopen the permit. Mayor and Commissioner Turnburg, we can reopen the permit again. so that they do not incur another additional cost for any permit or time lost or anything like that. We can have that permit open tomorrow morning and allow them the two weeks on it. At the two-week mark, they're going to have to have passed all of their framing inspections, all of their exterior inspections. Now, in two weeks, are we going to honor the 30 days of... the in the in the agreement 30 days to side it because if that doesn't happen too, I mean it's it's kind of we need to know where our end point is going to be in two weeks, whether it should be where it should have ended on the 90 days and then they get an additional 30 decided. Or if we're looking at two weeks to completely finish the project. So if it's to completely finish the project, I do not believe that two weeks is enough. If it's to get it weathered in, I still don't believe two weeks is going to be enough.

I just don't understand how we are voting on feelings and not following city ordinance. This has been going on for over two and a half years. So that's the problem I have. And quite frankly, I see a family with a whole lot of boys And respectfully, I'm just wondering why there couldn't be teamwork together to get this done one more day? And you can answer me. That's not how a city commission meeting works. But I don't want to vote on feelings. We have city ordinances. We have rules. This has been extension after expired extension for two and a half years. Commissioner Strand.

My thinking is we get this two weeks to get them up to the 90-day threshold you had initially proposed, and they had agreed to. And then, of course, the clock is still running for the next 30 days to finish it. That's my thinking. I'll say one more thing. I don't know. Mayor, you're in the world of real estate. It probably costs $300,000, $400,000 to build a house these days. You know, I mean, the cost of living is just, and to demolish an existing structure is not the most sustainably resilient approach in life when you're losing what's all been invested. If we can take this home and get it livable, and this is on you, you're given one last chance to make this habitable and livable and safe. No, no, no, bear with me. But you're finding some leeway here with the commission that we have rules and policies and ordinances we're required to also follow for the safety of the public. But we're going to give you a chance. Maybe. I'm not sure it'll pass. But two weeks, you better have it up to the 90-day level. And then in 30 days after that, you better have it up to the 120-day level is what I would expect. And if you need the motion modified to clarify that, I'm willing to do that.

Mr. Peterson, are you in agreement with Commissioner Strand's modified motion?

Yeah, Mr. Mayor, without objection.

Thank you. Thank you. Mr. McLean.

She is for the modified motion. Since we have a settlement agreement, we can only extend it with a written agreement. So I think we need to authorize the mayor to sign a written agreement extending the 30 days for the exterior or 14 days for the exterior work and 30 days for the signing after that. I just want to make clear that you're being authorized to sign that.

Is that palatable?

Yes.

OK.

Without objection, Mr. Mayor, thank you.

Thank you. All right. Any other discussion? Mr. Radnick?

I just do want to point out that this is for the exterior of the structure only. There's still a substantial amount of work that needs to be done on the interior of the structure before it can be habitable for anybody to live in. So we were trying to work with them even on this, just trying to get them stepped through it so that they could continue to work. I just want to make that clear that it won't be a habitable structure after this. There's still a significant amount of work that would need to be done interior to this structure.

And Mr. Radnick, on that point then, let's say the two weeks are met, then the following 30 days are met, then it would be a matter of them coming to get a permit to do that additional work. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct.

Thank you.

Commissioner Strand.

I'd like to tell the public, this is what this department is supposed to do. And we had many years of properties in Fargo, prior to me being here, that we're falling into blight, and we didn't have the ability or teeth to require people to keep their standards up to what their neighbors needed. So thank you for doing your work, and thank you for bringing this to us. And it's not easy, but this is on our shoulders. You've done your job adequately, and your team is doing their job. And now we're just working with the public to find a middle ground, but this is what the inspections department is obligated to do.

Any other discussion, Commission? Discussion? Hearing none, we'll go to a roll call vote to authorize the mayor to extend the current agreement by two weeks beyond the 90-day window, and then another 30 days to allow for the siting project. Ms. Baumann.

Strand?

Yes.

Peterson?

Yes.

Gullickson? Yes. Turnberg? No. O'Shea?

Yes. Motion carries. All right. With that, as we near the end of here, we do have a public comment section. For those of you that register for that, that'll happen after this next item. But item number 39, we have our liaison commissioner assignment. So I'm going to start to my right with Commissioner Gullickson.

I've been regularly attending several of the various meetings in my portfolio. Just a couple of things that I wanted to bring up. Last week, I spent a half a day riding with our chief and looking at our various fire stations as we're looking at New things, there were four that I hadn't been to, so I appreciated that opportunity. We were also lucky enough to be able to take in some trench training, things that I didn't think about the fire department doing, but structure, support when there's been damage, and trench training. If people were trapped in a trench, it would be their job to get them out. I also completed another police ride along late at night. I went from 9 p.m. until I believe right around 2 a.m. I wanted to hit that bar close time with the college kids just coming back. The landscape looks a little bit different. And I was advised to do another one yet even later into the night, a little later in the year. So I'll be doing that. I do want to speak up for some of our entities that have been here tonight, as I am sure all of you have been. We have been inundated with emails in support of the various social programs that we support during this budget time. And I will say I've had several good meetings with several representatives. The Arts Partnership, of course, has come out in full force, so that is appreciated. I don't even know if I can keep up with you guys to write back to you. But thank you for reaching out. I also met with the homeless coalition and they did a great job of bringing forth their need, presenting why and how we all work together as a team. Our community has asked for working with our homeless, trying to find a way to help solve this. And I believe that might be a good way because my question since I got here is we have all these great entities How do we bring them all together to support this work? And when I met with Chandler, she is doing the work I have been asking. So, and bringing all those entities together, trying to kind of be the glue in between all of those. So I just wanted to acknowledge I'm having good meetings. Also had a good meeting with the CVB, with Shirley and her board members. And they also brought forth many things. I think there's a lot of things that our general public doesn't understand that these entities bring to us that we work as a partner with through the city. Things that benefit our city, it brings in tax dollars. It brings in hotel dollars. It fills those rooms. Those people buy gas. They eat in our restaurants. They shop in our stores. And so I think those are all just key things that we need to keep in mind as we travel this budget process. I know planning shared invitations, we didn't hear a lot from folks tonight. I think we'll hear more coming up on the 23rd, or at least I am hopeful so that we can have those discussions and our public can understand what these dollars are used for and how they benefit all of us. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Strand.

Thank you, Mayor. Just one more shout-out to the public that, you know, with nearly 60% of our people living in apartments, we have a lot of people with concerns about life in apartments, and we have landlords that provide them their space to live in. So the mayor, when he ran for office, he advocated for us listening to and learning from the renters and bringing the landlords and the tenants together to the best world we can in the future. On the 21st, we're going to have a public forum here in the city in the chamber. a listening session to hear from people on all sides of the issues with regards to renting issues, renting rights, renting concerns, renting advice going forward. And just, you know, we're going to listen and learn. So everybody put the word out that we're going to be here in the chambers learning from our public. And then we'll be convening at some point. The mayor will be leading us into convening a task force. that will be comprised of folks that we hear from and learn that day and others who wear many hats in that arena. So the 21st here in City Hall. Next week, this coming week, we will be in the League of Cities Conference in Grand Forks. I believe all of us probably will be attending, which I think is great. I don't know if I've ever seen all of Fargo City Commission attend in that North Dakota League of Cities. It's important that we're there and with our peers from across the state and getting to know each other. Many of us are from those small towns. So that's a terrific moment. We're meeting in Grand Forks, and after we have a convention center in the future, we'll be able to have that conference downtown Fargo. But right now we don't have the facilities to accommodate that. Lastly, Commissioner Peterson's birthday is the 23rd. I'm sorry, me and my birthdays, but we'll wish you the very best when your birthday rolls around, Commissioner.

Thank you. Commissioner Turnberg.

We are working on the budget. Feel free to reach out to me. A lot of work is being put into it, but we want to hear your ideas, suggestions, you name it. Thank you. Commissioner Peterson?

Mr. Mayor, thank you. Yeah, I've been very busy, as our predecessors have said, with portfolio assignments. Nothing really sticking out, and that's a good thing that we don't have anything catastrophic or of remark for me to comment on. So keeping busy, looking forward to the week or three days of camaraderie up north and I do think it's valuable for us to attend these things because we learn from our peers, we can share with our peers.

That's all I have Mr. Mayor, thank you. Thank you. As far as my report out, a lot of what I was going to say has been said so appreciate it commissioners. Had about a week and a half ago the opportunity to lead a question and answer in partnership with StudyND. They brought in the authors of Grandma Joy and Me, a young man and his grandma visiting all the national parks throughout the country. And that was co-hosted by the library. So that was fun to be a part of that evening. Last Friday, as we all took some time on our own to remember September 11th, our police and fire department did a Memorial 5K in honor of all first responders. And so that was happened, I believe they started about 746, which was the local time of when the first plane hit the World Trade Center last Friday. And then I want to celebrate some of our public employees. We've had some retirements recently. So last week was able to attend the retirement party for Dean Breen, who provided us 29 years of service to the city, most recently at the water reclamation facility. Officer Jason Skalicki was 23 plus years of service here in the police department. And Kim Wetz. with 46 years at Public Health. Most recently as the WIC director there, she retired. So thank you to our city employees and Team Fargo for your dedicated work, and I know that there's more people we'll be celebrating in the future. So with that, we have our public comments, and we had one individual sign up. So we would invite up Mr. Patrick Kadramas, and you can join us right up here to introduce yourself and share your comments with folks. And as a reminder, you'll have two and a half minutes. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor and city commissioners. My name is Patrick Adamas. I'm a resident of Fargo, and I'm also a student at North Dakota State University, where I serve as a student senator for our student government. The primary goal of student government is to advocate for and be the voice of the students at our institution. which is why I'm here speaking with you today. NDSU not only represents a college in the beautiful state of North Dakota, but it represents a community built on involvement, traditions, and culture. The city of Fargo plays a big role in this with the community coming out and supporting aspects of NDSU, like football, go Bison, but most importantly, our students. NDSU and the city of Fargo have the strongest connection when we come together as one to support our students who leave the university further. To continue this connection and develop it deeper on the student level, myself and other student government leaders want to propose a connection and bridge to us students that we have here at NDSU. The city of Fargo truly brings the best out of our students and is consistently rated as one of the best college communities in the entire United States. even over places like Minneapolis and Grand Forks. On behalf of our student government, we are more than happy to extend the invitation for any of you to come speak to our student senate and deepen our connection. If you are interested in speaking at one of our senate meetings, you can contact myself or our vice president after this meeting. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you all tonight, and I hope we can further this connection to make the city of Fargo a better place for NDSU and our college students.

Thank you, Mr. Catermus, and thanks for stepping up to lead your fellow students at NDSU. So with that, Commission, is there a motion to adjourn? Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? Discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. We are adjourned. Thank you.